From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Jan 15 02:09:09 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA05782; Fri, 15 Jan 1999 02:09:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 02:09:09 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199901150709.CAA05782@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #1 TELECOM Digest Fri, 15 Jan 99 02:08:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 1 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Another Year of the Digest (TELECOM Digest Editor) Pacific Bell Plans to Boost Rollout of Digital Subscriber Lines (Tad Cook) Bell Atlantic Trying to Show It's Open to Competition (Greg Stahl) PBX at Home (Max Morris) Motorola Expands CDMA Users' Digital Roaming Capabilities (Monty Solomon) Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says (Tad Cook) Book Review: "TCP/IP Network Administration", Craig Hunt (Rob Slade") Book Review: "The Internet Kids & Family Yellow Pages (Rob Slade) Book Review: "How to Access the Federal Government on Internet (Rob Slade) Book Review: "Harley Hahn's Internet & Web Yellow Pages (Rob Slade) Book Review: "The Internet Book", Douglas Comer (Rob Slade) Book Review: "Learning Perl", Randal L. Schwartz/T Christiansen(Rob Slade) Book Review: "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn (Rob Slade) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: editor@telecom-digest.org (Patrick Townson) Subject: Another Year of the Digest Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 10:00:00 CST Hello once again! Okay, I will admit that I have been lax in getting issues of the Digest out to you since before Christmas. I will *try* to increase production this year ahead of us, but with no promises right now as to how many issues will come out. I've got something else I am working on which for me holds a lot of excitement. I think I will soon be doing an 'internet radio' broadcast on a regular basis. For those of you not familiar with the concept, it works like this: If you have an audio/video player attached to your browser, you can view/listen to literally hundreds of television and radio stations which put their signal out on the net. In addition, there are numerous internet-only 'netcasters' who do not use the open airwaves as in traditional radio/television services. You simply use your browser to address their URL or home page, click on the 'listen live' icon, wait a few seconds for your Real Player to open and make a connection, then listen or watch the program/station. If you do not have a media player, any of them will gladly give you one for free. Many such services are listed on web pages in common, such as that of broadcast.com, which in addition to providing links to hundreds of others also provides its own content. Most of us would be hard-pressed to obtain time or space on the site of a commercial broadcaster, and even the internet-only netcasters are pretty much into it for the money. No money, no sponsor, no radio/TV program ... that simple. But there are exceptions, and I want to tell you about one of them today because I was thrilled to find them on the net. http://www.freespeech.org is a totally not-for-profit internet-only radio/television service which allows anyone to have space for free to present programs airing their views, their ideas, etc. All you need on your end is audio encoding software with an audio input on your computer. It helps of course to work hard at preparing a quality presentation, an interesting index.html on the front of it, and a modicum of decent recording equipment on your end. If you have video equipment, so much the better; you can use it also. It is all free of charge, but like yours truly they always are willing to accept contributions to help with their expenses. I am told it is run as a labor of love by one and a half people, which is a half of a person more than I have working on this Digest. Users are limited to 25 megs of space, which is really quite adequate to hold several thirty minute radio presentations or a couple of larger television presentations at a time, depending on how you put it together, etc. Your 'overhead' consists of using some of the space for an index.html and a short file (.ram) which is used to get the browser to open the media file (.rm) itself. A 43 minute test recording I made took about 5.5 megs for the .rm file. You prepare it all at your site then FTP it over to your directory on their site. You cannot get shell access at their site, just somewhat controlled FTP access to your own directory. Put your index.html, your assortment of .rm files with their associated .ram files over there and you are all set. **No commercial programming! No sponsors! No Visa/Mastercard! No spam! Just non-commercial free speech; all you want of it. You can ask for money for your efforts in a reasonable, non-offensive way.** It helps if your personal politics lean a bit to the left, Pacifica Radio style, like a college radio station, but they won't hold it against you if you don't keep your open mind so open that all your brains falls out. In the process of signing up for an account, they take great pains to point out that 'free speech', while theoretically free, isn't totally so. Regardless of what you think, for example, about the controversy surrounding copyright law; what you personally think about child porn having no free speech protection; what you personally feel should be allowed where lewd, crude and/or rude presentations are concerned on the net; they insist that participants on their 'television network' obey the law. They reserve the right to dump you if you become too much of a pain, if you cause legal problems or if you disrupt other programs being aired/produced, etc, which is how it should be. They *do* allow hate speech, but reserve the right to label it at such in their own master listing of program content. They are very anti- government and encourage programs on all sorts of relevant topics, as long as you don't break the law or encourage/aid/abet others in breaking it. I suppose you could probably put on a live sex act for others to watch (in the old CB Radio days, the guys would leave their microphones locked open while they were having sex so that everyone could hear the sounds, etc) but I suspect all it would do is get a few yawns from the 'been there, done it, seen it all' people who would tune it in. And if anything would mortify me more than being observed in such a posture, it would be knowing that my audience was bored with the presentation and tuning me out. So show some good taste and class, won't you? http://www.freespeech.org They bill themselves as Internet Television with programs produced by the people, 'because the people know better'. I think so too. Maybe I will see your program there, and I hope when I get mine up and running you will listen to it. You can tell them I referred you. Happy new year! PAT ------------------------------ Subject: Pacific Bell Plans to Boost Rollout of Digital Subscriber Lines Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 22:30:23 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) By George Avalos, Contra Costa Times, Walnut Creek, Calif. Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Dec. 15--The race to quicken the pace of using the Internet will soon get a boost from Pacific Bell, which will dramatically expand availability of a fast online technology that can compete against lightning-quick cable modems, and may lower the price for the service. The telephone company disclosed Monday it intends to speed up deployment of its digital subscriber line, or DSL, product. The technology is able to juice up the performance of standard telephone lines and render them capable of transmitting computerized data at speeds much faster than conventional phone-based modems. "We're going to be launching some aggressive plans on DSL in the next couple of weeks to put it into most Bay Area communities," said Gary Rath, an area vice president for Pacific Bell. Pac Bell is installing DSL gear at dozens of central switching offices around the state. The company has deployed the DSL technology in 89 California central offices. That's about 14 percent of the 650 central offices statewide. Pacific Bell also has installed DSL equipment at 24 of the company's 86 switching centers, or 28 percent of the total in the region. DSL, under Pacific Bell's current plans, would be installed in dozens more switching offices in California. Some industry insiders familiar with the plans have speculated the number of DSL-equipped switching offices will top 200 by the end of 1999. The phone company, though, wouldn't provide precise figures. "People are clamoring for high-speed Internet access," said John Britton, Pacific Bell spokesman. "California is probably where people want this technology more than anyplace else." California is the state where 35 percent of the nation's Internet traffic begins and terminates, some industry insiders estimate. The phone company may have little choice but to move quickly to broaden its DSL customer base before people who want fast access to the Internet migrate to alternative products. A rival technology that uses a cable TV system to connect customers to the Internet is gaining subscribers rapidly. The cable-based service may get a boost next year when cable modems are more readily available in retail outlets. And analysts believe cable modems can transmit data more quickly than DSL networks. What's more, the Bay Area's cable modem service, Home, charges less -- about $40 a month -- to subscribe than Pacific Bell's least-expensive DSL option. Getting the DSL technology and an Internet connection costs at least $89 a month. But Pacific Bell is readying a counterattack on pricing, according to some previous comments made to analysts by the top executive at Pacific Bell's parent, SBC Communications Inc. Analysts have suggested that Pacific Bell's current DSL prices are too high for consumers. SBC boss Edward Whitacre said recently that he could foresee DSL pricing dropping as low as $50 to $60 a month for the slowest version of the service. That would put the cost more in the price range of mainstream digital consumers. Pacific Bell executives believe the back-and-forth battle over fast online access means consumers can come out winners. "I think 1999 will be the year of a memorable leap forward in the delivery of data communications to the home," Pac Bell's Rath said. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:24:29 -0500 (EST) From: Greg Stahl Subject: Bell Atlantic Trying to Show It's Open to Competition I just read an interesting piece in the 7 Jan 99 issues of Edupage stating that Bell Atlantic has developed a system to allow its "New York customers to change local phone providers easily and quickly". Has anyone heard anything about this ?? Thanks, Greg Greg A. Stahl- KE4LDD Communications Technician St. Lawrence University Telecommunications Dept. Canton, NY 13617 V- (315)229-5918 GSTA@music.stlawu.edu F- (315)229-5547 http://www.stlawu.edu/gsta "Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end" -Spock ------------------------------ From: Max Morris Subject: PBX at Home Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 01:06:32 -0800 Patrick and others at Telecom Digest, I wonder if you'd be able to help with this question? I've searched through your archives some but haven't been successful in finding an answer. I know this is sort of a loop around / DISA function, but cheap and easy for the home (though still with passcode capability!). I'd really appreciate a recommendation. Thanks very much!!! -Max Morris > From: Toby Nixon > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 1999 10:37 AM > To: Max Morris > Subject: RE: PBX at home > > I have definitely seen mention of devices that allow you to call in on one > line, enter a password, and be connected to a second line, for much less > than a PBX. I've seen these mentioned on comp.dcom.telecom. I don't > remember what they were called, though. I've done some quick poking around > and haven't turned up anything, but I think if you posted a message to > that newsgroup, or gave a call to Patrick Townson (847-727-5427) or Mike > Sandman (630-980-7710), you'd turn up something. > > -- Toby > > -----Original Message----- > From: Max Morris > Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 1999 10:42 PM > To: Toby Nixon > Subject: PBX at home > > Hi Toby, > > I wonder if you could do me a favor and give me some advice. > > I'm looking to buy something that will give me the following > functionality. I have two telephone lines at home, say A and B. I have > very cheap international rates at home through MCI (10 cents per minute to > the UK, anytime) on line B. I would like to be able to call inbound on > line A from work or my cell phone (a cheap local call), enter some > security code, get dialtone on line B, and place an outbound international > call to the UK getting the cheap rate and costing work or me on the cell > phone little to nothing. > > I've looked around and can't find anything simple that will do this. I > know a PBX or key system should be able to do this, but that seems like > overkill to have in my home. Can you think of something on the cheaper > side that can do this for me? Pointers to useful web sites would be great > if you can't think of a specific product. > Thanks very much! > -Max [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are 'WATS extenders' still being sold by a few companies but their usefulness versus their danger is questionable considering how inexpensive long distance rates have become in recent years and how much hacking and phreaking is done on the phone network with the likelyhood that sooner or later -- and probably sooner -- someone is going to dial that number, hear dial tone as an answer and set about breaking your passcode. It is always risky business leaving a dial tone where others can find it. You can get software for your computer which will answer one line and allow it to be linked to another line without actually letting you (or any unauthorized others) hear dial tone. It just takes the incoming line off hook and sits there in dead silence. Once you have entered your password and given it the full ten or more digit number you wish to call, it looks through its database to see if such a call is auth- orized and then puts it through on a second line, making a bridge to the first line only when it hears a voice on the second line. You could write the database of authorized numbers to exclude everything but the one single number you call in the UK. When you entered that one number, it would find it to be authorized, dial it and patch the lines together. Anyone else entering an 'unauthorized number' (in this example, every number in the world except the one you call) would find themselves sitting in silence for a few seconds and then abruptly disconnected. Or you might try a service like 'My Line' from Call America. It is a dedicated 800 number both for incoming and outgoing calls. People can dial it and reach you, but you can also dial it, enter your pass- code and make outgoing calls, including international calls. Get the details on this from jbucking@callamerica.com I've had a My Line account for several years now and love it. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Motorola Expands CDMA Users' Digital Roaming Capabilities Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 15:50:02 -0500 Motorola Expands CDMA Users' Digital Roaming Capabilities Via Service Option Negotiation January 6, 1999 12:46 PM EST ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, Ill.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 6, 1999-- Digital Cellular Operators Can Offer More Flexible Service to Customers Of Enhanced Variable Rate Coder Networks Motorola, Inc.'s Network Solutions Sector (NSS) announced today it is offering its CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) operators the ability to expand their customers' digital cellular roaming capabilities with the introduction of enhanced system software. With Motorola NSS' Service Option Negotiation solution, customers who currently enjoy the benefits of state-of-the-art 8K EVRC (Enhanced Variable Rate Coder) call quality can now take their digital features with them when they roam throughout Motorola NSS-based networks. Operators with CDMA equipment supplied by Motorola NSS, or by a combination of Motorola and other vendors, can take advantage of this solution to provide their EVRC customers seamless digital coverage throughout all of their markets. To date, Motorola NSS is the only cellular network vendor to offer Service Option Negotiation to address the EVRC roaming issue. Service Option Negotiation, an industry standard protocol, sets up the commands by which a cellular base station communicates with the cellular handsets throughout a system. When a caller enters into a network's coverage area, the cellular handset must "speak the same language" as the network in question. In the cellular industry, the most recent advance in digital voice encoder technology is EVRC, a feature which provides landline-quality voice transmission, superior capacity gains and complete background noise suppression. But until now, customers on EVRC networks have been unable to take advantage of these features when roaming outside of their home system and into incompatible digital networks - networks which do not incorporate EVRC vocoders. Lack of Service Option Negotiation causes EVRC digital calls to be converted to analog systems or dropped entirely because the handsets do not speak the same language as the non-EVRC network. Motorola NSS' solution requires no hardware upgrades to the CDMA network or software upgrades to customers' digital cellular handsets. Additionally, it provides a graceful migration path both to future vocoder technologies and to next generation digital standards. The solution is commercially available today. Operators can receive the Service Option Negotiation with Motorola NSS' standard CDMA software offering. "As the leader in value-based software development, we strive to provide cellular operators and service providers with software that increases their revenue base by augmenting their customers' minutes-of-use," said John Cipolla, vice president and general manager of Motorola NSS' CDMA Systems Division. "We are enthusiastic about our interoperability solutions, such as Service Option Negotiation, and hope other infrastructure vendors will take a similar approach." In a report issued last month by the Cahners In-Stat Group, a leading wireless industry research and consulting firm, Motorola NSS was cited as the leading international provider of commercial CDMA digital cellular networks. The analysis of cellular, PCS and wireless local loop markets shows Motorola NSS with a total of 31 commercial system awards internationally. Others include Lucent with 17 awards; Qualcomm, 16; Nortel, 10; and Samsung, four. Motorola NSS combines the operations of the former cellular infrastructure group and iDEN organizations and is responsible for manufacturing, sales and integration of Motorola's cellular infrastructure and iDEN cellular/two-way radio products. NSS is a multi-billion dollar business with more than 16,000 employees. Headquartered in Arlington Heights, Illinois, NSS has major engineering, marketing and manufacturing facilities in northern Illinois, Texas, Arizona, Florida, the United Kingdom, Israel, Brazil, China/Hong Kong, Singapore and Japan. Motorola, Inc. is a global leader in advanced electronic systems and services. Sales in 1997 were $29.8 billion. For further information on Motorola, please visit the web site at http://www.motorola.com/. ------------------------------ Subject: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 22:30:25 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Ameritech's New Call-Blocking Service Is Too Costly, Trade Group Says By Doug Sword, The Indianapolis Star and News Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Jan. 5--If you've ever wondered what it would be worth to rid yourself of pesky, dinner-interrupting telemarketers, Ameritech has the answer: $3.95 a month. Beginning today, Ameritech will roll out its new Privacy Manager service in three Indiana cities -- Indianapolis, Gary and Hammond. While the service costs $3.95 a month, it requires Caller ID with Name to work, which costs an extra $9.50 a month. That's too much, says a telemarketing group, arguing that consumers can get pretty much the same result by being firm with telemarketers and asking to be removed from calling lists. Unlike any other privacy-protection service, such as Caller ID, Privacy Manager will identify 100 percent of callers, says Curt Witte, Ameritech's vice president for customer applications. That offers customers a degree of control over their phone line they've never had before, he said. This is how it works: Privacy Manager kicks in when a call shows up as "blocked," "private," "out of area," "unavailable" or "unknown" on a Caller ID display. Ameritech's research shows that calls from telemarketers generate a large majority of these kinds of messages, Witte said. Before connecting the call, Privacy Manager kicks in and asks the caller to give his or her name. In initial testing, seven out of 10 of these callers simply hung up, Witte said. "The beauty is that your phone doesn't even ring," he said. If the caller does identify himself or herself, the consumer's phone rings and a recording of the name is played. If the consumer presses "1" on the touch-tone phone the call is put through and pressing "2" rejects the call. Pressing "3" activates a message that informs the caller that telemarketing calls are not accepted at this residence and asks that the consumer's name be added to the telemarketer's "do not call" list. That's a legally binding request, Ameritech points out. Federal law prohibits telemarketers from calling someone who's made such a request for 10 years. Consumers can make the same legally binding requests themselves without paying $13.45 a month for Caller ID and Privacy Manager, says Chet Dalzell, spokesman for the Direct Marketing Association, a telemarketing industry trade group. "Generally, any consumer who does not want to receive telemarketing calls at home has choices," he said. Telling each telemarketer who calls to remove your name from a calling list is one way to do it. Anyone wishing to be removed from the calling lists of all Direct Marketing Association members need only send a letter with their name, address and phone number to Telephone Preference Service, Direct Marketing Association, P.O. Box 9014, Farmingdale, NY 11735-9014. Some customers love to buy the latest telephone technology and Privacy Manager "is a feature that some people will find handy," said Jerry Polk, utility policy analyst for Citizens Action Coalition. But Privacy Manager raises the question of "Where does it end?" he said. Local phone companies came up with Caller ID, then they sold a product to telemarketers that blocked Caller ID, Polk said. Now Ameritech has come up with a new feature that thwarts the Caller ID block. Ameritech plans to follow Privacy Manager's introduction with an advertising campaign beginning Jan. 18. The ads will feature peaceful home scenes, asking the viewer if it's worth interrupting a family's time together with calls from telemarketers. One of the ads targets Ameritech's rivals, long-distance companies, as a prime source of intrusive telemarketing calls. The technology that allows an answering system to interact with both a caller and a customer is new and exclusive to Ameritech. The Chicago-based company is negotiating with other telephone companies to sell them a license to use the technology. Ameritech rolled the product out first in Chicago and Detroit last September, followed by Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio. The trio of Indiana cities where Privacy Manager becomes available today represents the third wave of the product's rollout. Ameritech will offer the product in stages through next year in the remainder of its five-state Midwestern territory. Privacy Manager, like Caller ID and call-waiting, falls into a category of products that aren't regulated by Indiana. Ameritech critics claim that the cost of adding such products to a phone line is only a small fraction of what the company charges for them. Critics also point to the huge profits these unregulated products generate as a major reason Ameritech has reported record profits in each of the last five years. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 08:13:34 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "TCP/IP Network Administration", Craig Hunt Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKTCPADM.RVW 981025 "TCP/IP Network Administration", Craig Hunt, 1998, 1-56592-322-7, U$32.95/C$46.95 %A Craig Hunt %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1998 %G 1-56592-322-7 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$32.95/C$46.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 630 p. %T "TCP/IP Network Administration, second edition" The growth of the Internet, in terms of the number of computers connected, has been doubling each year for at least the last fifteen. This means that in this coming year about thirty million computers will get connected, and in the year following, approximately sixty million. This growth cannot continue indefinitely. One constraint is the number of computers in the world, and another is the limit on the number of numeric Internet IP addresses available, although IPv6 may soon extend that a fair ways. One of the most important limiting factors, however, is the availability of knowledge about the connection and configuration of computers to the Internet. Hunt, with his initial release of this book, went a fair way to removing this last as a barrier. His test is now the standard text for those running ISPs (Internet Service Providers), intranets, and corporate connections to the Internet. If you are a UNIX system manager, this book is a thorough guide to configuring an Internet connection. (Even if you are not on the Internet, it is an excellent overview of the requirements for using TCP/IP to network your own machines.) For some, the guide may be on the technical side--but then, network administration is a formidably technical task. In spite of the nature of the topic, Hunt has done a superlative job in ensuring that the content is not only clear, but readable as well. The first three chapters discuss the concepts behind TCP/IP, routing, and the domain name and name service. The next six cover the basics of connections and configuration. Chapter ten provides information on sendmail. This is likely separated from details on the primary network services in chapter thirteen due to the broader nature of sendmail's functions. There are also chapters on troubleshooting, security. Appendices cover additional topics such as serial link interfaces and dynamic configuration. If you are not working in UNIX, many of the low level specifics will not be of much use. Many of the items, however, can either be used as rough outlines, or adapted to non-UNIX systems. Many programs may be different, but a lot of the structure, data and concepts will be the same. For those charged with the practical details of bringing a system into the Internet, this book is uniquely helpful. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1998 BKTCPADM.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 19:12:52 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "The Internet Kids & Family Yellow Pages Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINKDYP.RVW 981025 "The Internet Kids & Family Yellow Pages/Golden Directory", Jean Armour Polly, 1997, 0-07-882340-4, U$19.99 %A Jean Armour Polly mom@netmom.com %C 300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario L1N 9B6 %D 1997 %G 0-07-882340-4 %I McGraw-Hill Ryerson/Osborne %O U$19.99 905-430-5000 fax: 905-430-5020 %P 576 p. %T "The Internet Kids & Family Yellow Pages/Golden Directory second edition" A great many of the child or educationally oriented books on the Internet have lists of resources, but this addition has considerably more range, or at least size, than most of the others. As with various titles in the "yellow pages" ("Golden Directory" outside of the US) series, the collection is a massive one, even though it couldn't be exhaustive. For kids, with incessant demands for information on every topic under the sun, massive is what you want. (It even has a listing for Alta Vista, Digital's "mother of all" search engines.) The main bulk of the book lies in the listings. Rather ironically, in attempting to provide a sufficient number of subject headings, the author/editor may have gone a little overboard. There is, for example, a section on the United States, including subsections on both the federal government and politics, but there is also a main subject listing for U.S. Presidents and First Ladies. Then again, there isn't a history subsection under United States, but there are subsections for U.S. History and U.S. History-Civil War under the main History subject. The index is reasonable, though not exhaustive, and should make up for shortcomings in the organizational structure. There is also an introduction with a few useful tips that unfortunately seem to get lost in a fair amount of verbiage. A concluding section seems to have sometimes questionable answers to parent's questions, and some parenting related sites. The sites are well chosen. There is a wide range of both topics and levels. (A helpful feature for a future edition might be the inclusion of indicators for grade and age suitability.) Occasionally the descriptions contain erroneous or misleading "facts": this is possibly due to taking the claims listed in those sites at face value without checking. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996, 1998 BKINKDYP.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 21:00:17 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "How to Access the Federal Government on Internet Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKHAFGOI.RVW 981025 "How to Access the Federal Government on the Internet 1998", Bruce Maxwell, 1997, 1-56802-295-6, U$28.95 %A Bruce Maxwell bmaxwell@mindspring.com %C 1414 22nd Street N.W., Washington, DC 20037 %D 199 %G 1-56802-295-6 %I Congressional Quarterly Inc. %O U$28.95 800-638-1710 fax 202-887-6706 bookhelp@cq.com %P 282 p. %S Washington Online %T "How to Access the Federal Government on the Internet 1998" For those interested in (the U.S.) government, and access to its information, Maxwell has provided a very useful compendium of addresses. As he admits, this is not an exhaustive list to U.S. federal government systems available through the Internet, but it definitely gives a good, broad starting field. University and other sites with a specialized interest in the government are listed, although strictly political organizations are rare. For example, the "Queer Resources Directory" is included, but the Electronic Frontier Foundation is not. The reader is expected to be reasonably familiar with the Internet use: the information given in the introduction is intended only to help keep the listings brief. (One addition to the introduction is a section on the reliability, or lack thereof, of Internet data. The piece notes that not all discrepancies are due to propagandists: source material providers have been known to release multiple versions of the same document.) The site descriptions do note the type of access method (increasingly, of course, this is the World Wide Web). General instructional material has been removed, helping to reduce the size of the book, and limit it to the reference information itself. All of that would be extremely valuable for those interested in government and access to information, but since the feds have fingers in just about every pie, there is much more. The various departments provide information on access to information, agriculture, arts and museums, business, children and families, defense, computers, demographics, education, emergency response, energy, environment, foreign affairs, medicine, history, employment, law, technology, space, and transportation. Government sites often provide the most informative content to be found in the net. Maxwell has added to this with a very useful index: I didn't really expect to find anything under computer viruses but was pleasantly surprised to note an entry for the NIST Computer Security Resource Clearinghouse and the CIAC (Computer Incident Advisory Capability) site. (Which points out the fast changing nature of the net: since the book was published NIST has, alas, virtually eliminated its role in this area.) For the avid U.S. government watcher, an essential. For the serious Internet information gatherer, regardless of nationality, a very useful resource. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995, 1996, 1998 BKHAFGOI.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 08:06:34 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Harley Hahn's Internet & Web Yellow Pages Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINTYLP.RVW 981025 "Harley Hahn's Internet & Web Yellow Pages/Golden Directory", Harley Hahn, 1997, 0-07-882300-5, C$42.95 %A Harley Hahn %C 2600 Tenth St., Berkeley, CA 94710 %D 1997 %G 0-07-882300-5 %I Osborne McGraw-Hill %O C$42.95 800-227-0900 1-800-2-MCGRAW FAX: 1-717-794-2080 %P 904 p. + CD-ROM %T "Harley Hahn's Internet & Web Yellow Pages/Golden Directory 1997 Edition" An Internet "Yellow Pages" is no less ambitious a project than a "White Pages," probably more so. The pace of change on the Internet is rapid, and ill-suited to the long lead times of book publishing. In addition, the volume and range of information on the net is staggering. Nevertheless, even the very brief "catalogues" found in introductory guides tend to be a lot of fun and serendipitously useful. This is fun. There are addresses for famous people, programming resources, UFO theorists, software utilities, government information and all the various and varied topics of the net. There are cartoons and graphics included; about four per page; which seem to take the place of the advertising in a regular yellow pages directory. This is somewhat useful. For Internet resource people, this is a lot faster than "grep"ing the active-groups and list-of-lists files when the persistent "What can you do on the Internet?" question pops up. The closest competition, "New Riders' Official Internet Yellow Pages" (cf BKNRYLPG.RVW) is more formal but actually contains fewer listings, and is not as likely to find information on what you are looking for. This needs work. The entries lean heavily on Web pages and are light on mailing lists. The large format and 900 pages of listings look impressive until you see the amount of white space and number of cartoons. (The white space ["yellow" space?] *does* make the layout attractive and easy to read.) The subject categories could stand some input from a "real world" document such as a real yellow pages directory or the Sears list of subject headings. The index is vital, and needs the most work of all in order to make this a major reference work. I also note still more degradation in the quality of the information in this edition. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994-1998 BKINTYLP.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:48:09 -0800 Subject: Book Reivew: "The Internet Book", Douglas Comer Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINTBOK.RVW 981025 "The Internet Book", Douglas Comer, 1997, 0-13-890161-9 %A Douglas Comer dec@purdue.edu %C 113 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 %D 1997 %G 0-13-890161-9 %I Prentice Hall %O (515) 284-6751 FAX (515) 284-2607 %P 327 p. %T "The Internet Book: Everything You Need to Know About Computer Networking and How the Internet Works, second edition" It is difficult to find books which give some background to the Internet. Most guides assume that readers are either already thoroughly familiar with computer communications, or are uninterested. The history of the Internet often vaguely mentions military or government projects without giving much idea of the problems which needed solving. Given the growth in computer networking, a reference is needed which lies between non-explanations ("This computer is connected to that computer and they talk to each other") and the TCP/IP programming manuals. This book fills a lot of those gaps. After an initial introduction to the current state of the Internet, chapters two through six give a very simple introduction to data communications and the need therefor. Those who have any kind of technical communications background may find the explanations a touch simplistic. On the other hand, I have frequently found that, even among the computer elite, telecommunications is a specialty and mystery area. With such rapid Internet growth, and for those who need some level of explanation without getting beyond their technical depth, this is likely to be very useful. It's easily readable. (It's also accurate.) Chapters seven to ten explain the drive for, and growth of, the Internet including excellent explanations of "why". The basic underlying concepts of the Internet protocols are covered in chapters eleven to seventeen, before nine chapters describe the primary application level tools of the system. These sections are written at a conceptual level, dealing with what the various tools can do, rather than the minutiae of what button to push to get a specific program to do it. This approach ensures that the book will be relevant in all situations, and will not go out of date quickly. A concluding chapter ties it all together with a look at both the benefits and some of the problems of the vast "digital library." This is an important addition to the library of Internet references. I heartily recommend it to those involved in network training, both as a resource, and as insurance that you truly understand what you are teaching. To date, the primary source material for the study of the development of the Internet, aside from the RFCs (Requests For Comments) themselves, has been the "Internet System Handbook" (cf. BKINTSYS.RVW), but it tends to be written at a technical or academic level. For those at the non-technical level who are wondering what the heck the Internet is (and one of Comer's anecdotes points out the hilarious misconceptions that are abroad), and what it all means, this is your book. (Once again, I must declare a bias in regard to this book. I am mentioned in the acknowledgements, although my "contribution" to the book was simply to review an early draft of the first edition. An excerpt from my review of the first edition also appears in the cover blurbs. Nonetheless, I can honestly say that I have not found any other book that explains the concepts and principles behind the Internet as well as this one. With the passing of the years some of my "top four" Internet picks; "The Internet Navigator" [cf. BKINTNAV.RVW], "Finding it on the Internet" [cf. BKFNDINT.RVW], and "Zen and the Art of the Internet" [cf. BKZENINT.RVW]; have become, while still valuable, less immediately relevant. This text is still, and perhaps increasingly, important.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1998 BKINTBOK.RVW 981025 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1999 10:12:45 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Learning Perl", Randal L. Schwartz/Tom Christiansen Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKLRNPRL.RVW 981024 "Learning Perl", Randal L. Schwartz/Tom Christiansen, 1997, 1-56592-284-0, U$29.95/C$42.95 %A Randal L. Schwartz %A Tom Christiansen %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1997 %G 1-56592-284-0 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$29.95/C$42.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 302 p. %T "Learning Perl, second edition" One of the advantages of the Apple II computer (Yes, son, I *am* old enough to remember that. Now put that lollipop down and listen) was the Applesoft tutorial on the BASIC computer language. With a steady pace, interesting examples, some wit, and a reasonable curriculum, it taught tens, perhaps even hundreds of thousands of people, how to program. It taught them BASIC, of course, which was a fatal flaw, but you can't have everything. The loss of the tutorial book, in the IIg and Mac lines, was a regrettable happening. "Learning Perl" may not take its place entirely, but it comes close. The humour is definitely there, starting even before the book does, in the foreword. Sometimes it is devious and subtle, as in the program which asks for "any last request" ... and then discards the input before informing the hapless user that the request cannot be performed. The pacing is realistic, as are the examples, although perhaps a bit slow to come to something useful, or likely to grab immediate attention. However, this book is not going to make many converts from the non- programming crowd. While chapter one is a very careful, step-by-step, approach to input and output, with some manipulations of text for error checking, chapter two immediately plunges into scalar variable and all operators, while three deals with arrays. Not that the sections are written poorly, by any means, but they would be a tad intimidating for the novice. Other topics covered include control structures, hashes, basic I/O, regular expressions, functions, miscellaneous control structures, filehandles and file tests, formats, directory access, file and directory manipulation, process management, other data transformation, system database access, user database manipulation, converting other languages to Perl, and CGI programming. For those who are truly keen to learn Perl (such as the legions of Webmasters needing to collect and manipulate data from forms) this is a good introduction. There are questions at the end of each chapter, and an appendix with the answers. Appendix B lists libraries and modules, C gives a brief introduction to networking topics in Perl, and D covers other topics. The foreword promotes Perl as a general purpose computer language. If that is so, then it is a very complex tool and one cannot expect much of a tutorial. On the other hand, references to Perl tend to stress its capacity for building "quick and dirty" tools for text manipulation, primarily mail. If this is so, then some simple but real-life examples, such as a rot13 reader or a program to extract articles from electronic digests, would have improved the work. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1993, 1998 BKLRNPRL.RVW 981024 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 11:43:25 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINCORF.RVW 981024 "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn, 1996, 0-07-882138-X, U$32.95/C$47.95 %A Harley Hahn %C 300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario, L1N 9B6 %C 2600 Tenth St., Berkeley, CA 94710 %D 1996 %G 0-07-882138-X %I Osborne/McGraw-Hill %O U$32.95/C$47.95, 905-430-5000/800-227-0900/800-2MCGRAW %P 802 p. %T "The Internet Complete Reference, second edition" You have to warm to the enthusiasm of a book which says that the Internet is more impressive than the pyramids, more beautiful than Michelangelo's "David" and more important than the inventions of the industrial revolution. In the first paragraph of the Introduction. Those of us who are barraged with calls for "point-and-click- everything" can be equally heartened by the statement that the Internet is not for dummies, though not only for nerds: "It is for those people who are willing to think and to learn." Having said that, this guide is particularly suited to the new user unsure of what to use the Internet for. The material is of limited technical depth, and is delivered with humour which lightens the tone. Unfortunately, this edition has started down the slippery slope of sarcasm that has limited other works. Topics covered in the book include a conceptual background to the Internet, an overview of applications, as well as the hardware, software, and service requirements for connecting to the net. In this, and in later chapters discussing specific applications, the author recommends some study of the UNIX operating system and its tools. In this day of graphical interfaces it may be felt that UNIX is redundant, but an understanding of the system can go a long way to explaining seeming oddities in net behaviour. As well, many people still access the net through community based systems that rely on text based tools such as pine and lynx. Discussion of mail involves email addressing (with perhaps a little too much coverage of sending mail to other networks), email concepts, and the pine mail agent. (Oddly, the chapter on mailing lists comes near the end of the book.) The World Wide Web has chapters on background, graphical browsing, advanced topics, and lynx. There are solid explanations of Usenet, gopher, ftp, telnet, talk, IRC (Internet Relay Chat), and MUDs (Multiple User Domains). Those who know what they want from the Internet may wish to look at more specific and detailed works. Too, this volume does tend to emphasize Unix and the Unix applications. (Hahn does not neglect chances to promote his other books, particularly those on UNIX.) Still, this primer does cover much ground that a lot of the newer Internet guides neglect. Worth considering for the beginning browser. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1998 BKINCORF.RVW 981024 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus and book info at http://www.victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #1 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 27 19:17:40 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA00772; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 19:17:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 19:17:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199901280017.TAA00772@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #2 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 19:16:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 2 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN (Ronda Hauben) Re: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN (Ronda Hauben) Video Over ISDN (Joachim Weber) Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Michael A. Covington) 1+ Long Distance (Keith Michaels) Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts (Tad Cook) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN Date: 26 Jan 1999 23:50:15 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Following is a report by Gordon Cook sent to the IFWP list which is helpful in understanding some of what has been happening with the behind the scenes maneuvers of the U.S. government to transfer Internet assets from the public to the private sector. My comments on this will follow in the next message. From: Gordon Cook Subject: [ifwp] what ICANN is up to: the financial arrangements for paying IANA salaries; why the NIST solicitation for ICANN contracts is illegal and can be stopped with an ORSC protest letter; why its a waste of board member's time to talk to mail lists; conversations with esther dyson and mike roberts and others For the past 48 hours I have done nothing but research and write the following. Keeping IANA Paychecks Coming The process last summer of setting up newco (IANA) essentially ran out of time. Details like the coming October 1 unemployment of the IANA staff, including Jon Postel, went into the month of September unsettled. They did so presumably because the parties putting things together assumed that Magaziner would have no choice but to bless ICANN on October 1 and hand over keys to the kingdom to them as well as money for them to start doing their work. When it became clear that this likely would not happen, something had to be done about the paychecks of IANA employees. Mike Roberts on behalf of ICANN made a deal with USC and ISI whereby they (ISI) would enter a transition agreement with ICANN so that ICANN would pay the salaries of the IANA employees (six people) effective October 1. (Where ICANN gets the money is anyone's guess - likely from GIP - ie IBM.) Thus Mike Roberts found himself in a situation where he had to scurry at the end of September to file ICANN's incorporation papers so that as of October 1st ICANN would exist as a legal entity and be able to sign an agreement with ISI whereby the IANA employees remained legally ISI/USC employees with full benefits (health care etc). This was conditional on ICANN sending ISI a monthly check to cover the cost of their benefits through Dec 31, 1998. IANA expenses for office support, network connectivity etc would be paid from the DARPA Teranode network contract with ISI through 12/31/98. When they realized that 12/31/98 would come and go without a legally constituted and functional ICANN to take responsibility for the IANA employees, the December 24 agreement mentioned in the NIST solicitation in the January 6 Commerce Business Daily was struck to handle both functions. It supposedly is nothing more than a continuation of the agreements that were reached last summer with ICANN to continue to pay salaries and Terranode to cover network and other expenses. Solicitation Number 52SBNT9C1020 from NIST is to formalize these informal agreements by giving ICANN a NIST contract by which they will be responsible for paying for the IANA functions. ON Going Mechanics such as NIST Contract Versus NTIA MOU of 11/25/98 The on going needs which, like it or not, ICANN is now legally constituted to fill create a situation where it becomes very difficult for Becky Burr on the one hand and Elliot Maxwell to hold ICANN's feet to the fire on the issues of its unaccountable bylaws and openness. The reason why is that ICANN knows that IANA salaries must be paid and that other parts of the Magaziner constructed house of cards like the requirement for NSI to develop a shared database by April 1, 1999 with specs subject to review by an ICANN (NewCo) appointed review panel. (If memory serves me correctly Becky gave ICANN permission to appoint such a panel of experts.) The problem is that with each step of the way and each action or approval granted ICANN purely for administrative reasons, NTIA is in effect tacitly recognizing and transferring authority to IANA. The intent of the 11/25/98 MOU may have been good, but the fact of the matter however is that it looks like IANA can erode the good intent by simply out waiting NTIA. I suspect that legal action will be required to VOID the sole source solicitation or to sue the US Gov't and the ICANN board before we will see any change in ICANN's behavior. Given the direction of events ICANN will either open up its operations to public scrutiny or it will find itself in court. IOdesign is likely to sue again and given the course of events, we'd welcome that. To be meaningful the NTIA needs to revisit the ICANN MoU and spell out milestones and due dates for deliverables. If Becky and Elliot do not do this we may begin to wonder whether they mean for the MOU to be taken seriously. Lack of Trust, Suspicion and Paranoia Reaching new Highs I have seen a credible assertion that claims IANA staff are being restricted in technical communications they can have with with NSI. I have reached the appropriate people at NSI who have assured me that as far as they can tell all necessary channels of technical communication are fully open with IANA and with everyone else for that matter. I also reached Mike Roberts on his cell phone. Mike, in the middle of a business meeting, graciously took a very few minutes to hear my concerns. Mike said that he could unequivocally assure me that neither he, nor Esther, nor the ICANN board, nor any ICANN lawyers had placed any restrictions on the IANA staff. He added that he believed that it was only rumor and said that if there were any shred of truth to it would be Ron Ohlander, the ISI administrator who would know. (Legally ISI still is the employer of the IANA staff, so if any orders were given Ohlander would be in a posityion to know. I have a call into him but suspect that he will be unreachable before tomorrow.) On balance, I suspect - given that I have reached directly or indirectly virtually everyone involved - that the rumor was likely based on a misunderstanding and has no real substance. The probing however proved to be a useful exercise, because time and time again I was told that the amount of fear, distrust, and paranoia on the part of all was running extremely high. I conclude that two things are at fault. One ICANN's continued insistence on closed board meetings and secrecy, and two that the actions of the MIGHTY Five taken with Sims Cochetti and Magaziner to form ICANN last summer were deeply flawed ICANN Policy as a Destroyer of Trust I have documented elsewhere the widespread disgust with the ICANN Policy of closed board meetings Dave Farber - however well intentioned he may have been is one of the creators of this mess. On Monday, perhaps like the Sorcerer's apprentice horrified by what had transpired Dave stuck his neck out on the IFWP list and said: It is time to raise the issue yet again of the distressing fact that the Board meetings of ICANN are closed. Many moons ago several of us strongly suggested that it would be appropriate for the ICANN Board to operate under the same set of rules that US Federal Advisory Boards operate under as well as NotForProfit Boards like EFF and ISOC. Namely all meetings are open to the public to attend and listen. Often observers do not have the right to talk except for a set aside period during the meeting when 5 minute positions can be requested. The Board has the right to convene in Executive Session but in all cases the subjects that can be discussed at exec session are limited, sometimes by law and more often by good faith and the fear of law. I strongly suggest that this be the principle that ICANN adopt rapidly. Why am I bringing this up. I was told that the ICANN Board meeting in Singapore is closed and that there will be a open "meeting" the day before. That is not the same thing. Open meetings are a good way to gather opinions and an OPEN BOARD meeting is a necessary way to insure openness and the respect of the community WHICH THE ICANN BOARD MUST SERVE. (caps intentional). If there is a reason why this is not appropriate for ICANN but is for the others , I think the ICANN Board owes it to the community to tell us now those reasons in detail.[End quote of Farber message.] Esther Dyson chose to answer not Farber but Jeff Williams saying: Yes. It is in our bylaws and in all the public statements we have made. Basically, we could have had "open" board meetings with executive sessions that were closed, but we figured (the Initial Board voted) that this (below) is the best way to do it. Dave Farber to his great cerdit came back and wrote to the IFWP list: "Esther, There is no real problem scheduling an Exec Session for a Board meeting. The PITAC and all other federal Advisory Boards do that ALL the time. An open NON-Board meeting is not an OPEN BOARD Meeting. The public has a right to see how the issues are handled etc in such an organization and the best way to ensure that is to have OPEN Board meetings. Sorry, Dave" Farber made a third comment about how the logistics of such could be handled. Esther answered *NONE* of Farber's three comments. Unfortunately no list members spoke up on Farber's behalf. This morning however Esther Dyson did call me from the airport. We had an extremely useful 10 minute conversation before she had to run for her plane. She did not say it was off record. At the end I asked if there was anything off record, adding that I felt what she said needed to be accurate and wanted to try to ensure that. "Well why not send it to me before you put it out?" I hesitantly said yes and asked what kind of turn around I would get. 36 hours (she would be on net when she got the chance) was the reply as she dashed off. This leaves me with an unpleasant problem. I am going ahead with my notes on the call. I believe I can be quite accurate. If I am not I invite Esther to send me corrections of or do the correcting herself. Time here is important and her information, while not a huge surprise, is very helpful in understanding the dynamics of what is happening. Now for the details of the conversation: Dyson: I understand and am sympathetic to Dave Farber's call for open Board meetings. But you have got to understand that half our board is not American and they think the US federal open meetings law is something they should not have to subject themselves to. These are business people who don't have their board meetings in public. When they were invited to be on the ICANN board, they could read in the ICANN by laws that ICANN board meetings would be closed. This was something they felt comfortable with. COOK: But if you are saying that after Farber's posting you polled the board again and the board is STILL voting to keep board meetings closed, then some of the American members must also be voting despite the flack you are getting to keep the meetings closed? Dyson: Yes. Now when we get members, if the members vote for open board meetings, we will have to have open board meetings. So stick with us a while and the board meetings will eventually become open. You must understand: These are business people. Corporate boards don't have public board meetings. Cook: But this *IS* the internet for heaven sakes ....internet business is done in the open. Dyson: That's what the mail lists claim. But the mail lists are a self selected minority of the people that we must serve. Those not on the mail lists are quite happy with what we are doing. [Cook: I believe this to be almost a verbatim quote of Esther's words.] I have a thick skin so I am willing to subject myself to abuse. But why should the board members be forced to waste their time listening to and dealing with the wild accusations that abound on these lists? Cook: Agreed that it can get quite abusive, but the abuse comes with the territory. What if IFWP were run on a server where civil discourse rules apply and are ENFORCED! Dyson: Sounds attractive. Cook: I am very hopeful that this will happen. Please join us there. Talk to us. With substance. With fair answers to questions designed to establish some common values and build some trust. Dyson: perhaps. Let me consider it. Cook: please do. Let me just say that the board suffers from the same disease that NSI management did in assuming that Internet mail lists are an irritant.....something that doesn't matter. I was told that twice last year by Don Telage as I tried to explain that NSI's refusal to allow any NSI employee had help to cement hatred of NSI on the network. Perhaps the show down with Becky last September, gave NSI second thoughts because NSI has changed its policy. Sounds like the board is going to have to learn the same lesson that NSI learned. Dyson: I hear what you are saying but unfortunately there's not time to respond....gotta run, bye. Jock Gill (holder of the first major internet policy position in the clinton administyration) wrote me privately a day ago and captured the essense of what Esther was saying. (Used with Jock's permission). The issue, I think, is that the good folks you (Gordon) inquired about come from, for the most part, old industrial/educational hierarchies which are famous for being autocratic, top down, feudal fiefdoms with all the management style that implies. As well as no requirements to run open meeting in a democratic way -- they do not come from the world of elected public servants who assume such rules. Thus why would we expect them to act in any way other than what they have been successful at? New tricks for old dogs? Not too likely. Let's not ask for miracles. Who on the board in question really understands the concept of stupid networks and smart edges and the new management paradigm it is enabling? Who on the board understands management by dialogue, not monologue? What Then is the Solution? Although I haven't asked Dave Farber directly, I suspect and certainly *HOPE* that he is horrified by what he and the remainder of the Mighty Five have done. Lets assume Esther gave a fair rendition of what the reasons are for ICANN's silence in front of the rest of the Internet. Farber, Cerf, Roberts, Landweber and Bradner are smart enough to know that in working with Sims and Cochetti and Magaziner in the summer and in agreeing to create a board of business people who knew nothing about the internet they were creating a potential monster - certainly that they were creating an entity that in being haughty and closed to the open discussion culture of the net would be asking for recrimination and conflict. Because they acted as a cabal to provide adult supervision to the Internet, they may well now have created an entity that will be still born because it simply cannot get enough trust from anyone involved to do its job. Dave Farber is to be commended for speaking out on Monday. But with no one crawling out on the limb behind him he has fallen silent. I hope he spoke out because he is looking at what he helped to create and is horrified by what he sees. It seems that the best way for Dave to show that he was serious is to keep up the pressure.. IF THE MIGHTY FIVE JUST MADE AN HONEST MISTAKE LAST SEPTEMBER NOW IS THE TIME FOR THEM TO SHOW THAT SUCH IS THE CASE. The NIST Solicitation on Behalf of NTIA Meanwhile we must ask what Becky Burr is doing with NTIA solicitation on behalf of ICANN? I spoke late Tuesday afternoon to Teresa Reefe, contracts specialist at NIST. COOK: Why to NIST? Why not NTIA? Reefe: because while NTIA has a grants and cooperative agreements office, it does not have a contracts office and this is a contract with ICANN. COOK: who decided it would be a contract and on what grounds? Reefe: I'd like to know that myself. it was our lawyers downtown. they just delivered intrustions out here. When NTIA does a contract they have to use our office (Nist) COOK: Does the FAR apply? Reefe: yes COOK: the CBD said Nist intends to award a sole source contract to ICANN for operation of the Internet Assigned Numbers authority. What is meant by "operation"....?? How is the IANA defined? Are we talking about paying the salries of Joyce reynolds bill manning and others? Reefe: don't know.... that will be part of the solicitation being prepared. Cook: Ahh....solici ------------------------------ From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Re: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN Date: 26 Jan 1999 23:51:28 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Thanks to Gordon Cook for his recent report on what is happening with the NIST annoucement for giving the IANA contract to ICANN. However, I want to add some aspects that Gordon left out in this situation. The problem to me is *not* that the NTIA or NIST is sole sourcing this contract. The problem is 1) That it is holding IANA hostage to an illegitimate and secretly contrived plan to give away very lucrative assets to a private sector entity. These assets will give great power over the Internet and all who use it to those who grab control over this entity. 2) That IANA is too important a part of the Internet to be held hostage in this way. It isn't that some other private sector business entity should get control of IANA through competitive contract solicitations, but rather that a U.S. government entity that is appropriate, like DARPA, should continue to administer the contract with IANA and pay the salaries of those who work for IANA while there be a genuine discussion and examination of how to create a protected environment for IANA to function that includes the public interest being dominant, not commercial objectives. 3) That the U.S. public and folks all over the world have contributed to the funding of the Internet and of its development and achievements. These folks should not be disenfranchised by this power play of the U.S. government holding the paychecks of IANA folks hostage to their trying to pass enormously valuable and power giving assets to some private entities. 4) I didn't notice the U.S. government having any problem paying for the big bills that it has taken to build the Internet (for the U.S. share of the bills), and the public interest needs to be protected now and the Internet needs a way to scale and to continue to serve as a unique new medium of worldwide communication. Therefore the U.S. government should stop hassling the IANA folks and should make sure that their pay checks are paid by the U.S. government. 5) For a long range solution, the administrative fees for IP numbers shouldn't be going for profits for various entities, but if needed could pay the what are minimal costs for IANA folks salaries. 6) The fruit of a poison tree is poison. The longer this power play by the U.S. govenrment goes on, the worse the situation will get. There is the need for an investigation into how this all happened and a plan for making the needed changes so that the public interest is dominant in what is happening, not someone's idea of how to convert the Internet into a plaything for marketeers. 7) When Ira Magaziner called me this summer he said there were 2 problems the U.S. government was trying to solve. a) the problem with trademarks and domain names b) the problem of international pressure for participation in what happens with the Internet. (I don't have my notes now from talking with him, but I will try to find them to see more specifically what he said.) However, subsequent to talking with him, I have seen the minutes from the Federal Network Advisory Committee meeting in 1996 where the U.S. government talked about the need to protect American commercial interests with regard to the Internet and began a process of encouraging the Internet Society and it seems others like the European Union, WIPO etc to figure out how to take over IANA. Though there are minutes of this meeting, there is no real indication of the discussion that went on to make this decision. Nor is there any indication that there was any concern for or interest by any of those present in what the public interest is in regard to the present and future of the Internet and how this would be represented in plans for giving away public assets and control over IANA to some private sector corporation. This meeting in 1996 is exactly the kind of situation that computer pioneers like Norbert Wiener and others like C.P. Snow warned against happening at the 1961 conference they held on Scientists and Decision Making at MIT. They described how there would be government decisions that had to be made regarding the future of the computer and it was very important that these decisions *not* be made by a few people in secret, but that they be the subject of broad discussion and debate. They pointed out that when such important decisions were made by a few people they would more likely be bad decisions, while the broader discussion by large numbers of people made it more likely that such decisions would be good decisions. The decision to transfer IANA and other key and controlling functions of the Internet and the assets involved with these functions to a private sector entity is a bad decision. These are functions that need to be carried out in service of the public and they require public protection of the assets and the power so that it can be used for the cooperative purposes, not for some private purpose. The Internet is too important to be playing such power games with. It is good that Jim Fleming uncovered what is happening with the NIST giving ICANN a control to run IANA. But how to get the problem of what is happening out to as many people as possible is what seems to be needed and it would be good to have whatever help the press or people in the U.S. or around the world, or online or off line can give, as possible. In his talk at the MIT conference, C.P. Snow proposed the importance of as many people as possible knowing what was going on and being involved in the discussion of what should happen. This is what is needed now, and any help making that happen would seem to be of value. Thus what Cook describes is a power play using IANA and the Internet and its users as pawns. The 1961 meeting at MIT that predicted just such actions would happen and discussed how to deal with them is descrived in: Chapter 6 of Netizens "Cybernetics, Time-sharing, Human-computer Symbiosis and Online Communities" The chapter is online at http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook Ronda ronda@panix.com. ------------------------------ From: Joachim Weber Subject: Video Over ISDN Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 22:36:09 +0000 Organization: Aachen University of Technology / Rechnerbetrieb Informatik Hello, Is there anybody who can give some hints to me about how to transmit video (avi) via ISDN using a protocol named H.320 (H.221). I am using MS Visual C++ V6 and MS Direct Draws (6.0) Multimedia Facilities to display videos in windows applications. As this works rather good, my next task is to transmit audio and video data over ISDN. I am wondering wether there is a SDK or a driver which can help me in fulfilling the indicated task. Please note that this has nothing to do with internet. It is just about connecting a computer with an isdn card to a phone capable of receiving audio and video data in H.221 Hope someone knows something useful. Please let me know. Best Regards, Joachim Weber ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Covington Subject: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:31:21 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. Just now I got a call from one, an outfit called VPT that sells pagers. The only identifying information given was the 800 number, 1-800-388-2161, repeated many times. The Caller ID said only "out of area." Am I right that they're breaking some regulation? Is anyone here acquainted with them? Michael A. Covington / AI Center / The University of Georgia http://www.ai.uga.edu/~mc http://www.mindspring.com/~covington <>< ------------------------------ From: keith.r.michaels@boeing.com (Keith Michaels) Subject: 1+ Long Distance Organization: The Boeing Company Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 18:51:26 GMT Why do I have to choose a 1+ long distance carrier? Why can't I just use 1010+ numbers exclusively and forget about paying AT&T or MCI their minimum monthly. As far as I'm concerned, 1+ dialing offers NO advantage. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, you don't have to pick a 1+ carrier. Most telcos will let you default your long distance calls to carrier 'none'. Then dialing 1+ anything except 800/888/877 gets you a recorded message that your call cannot be completed as dialed. Ditto attempts to call '00', the long distance operator. But you do wind up dialing more digits, and asd Tad Cook points out in the next message a smart consumer can get much better deals. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:42:39 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts By Jennifer Files, The Dallas Morning News Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Jan. 26--Deborah Perl said no to every discount long-distance offer that came her way. The telemarketing tactics bothered her so much, she hardly thought about the deals she passed up. Like about half of U.S. customers, Ms. Perl, a pharmaceutical saleswoman in Dallas, stuck with her phone company's "basic" rates. While she frequently saw ads for dime-a-minute long-distance, her calls with AT&T cost up to 30 cents a minute. "As opposed to wanting to be the most educated consumer I could be, I was more concerned that the phone companies were bothering me," she said after checking last month's phone bill. Minutes later, she called AT&T. "I said, `OK, I just looked at my phone bill. I'm an idiot. We have to do something about this."' AT&T suggested a calling plan that Ms. Perl expects will cut her monthly long-distance bills by about $30. A surprising number of people pay too much for long-distance, simply because they never asked for a better deal. Only 36 percent of Americans subscribe to a discount program, according to a recent survey by Yankee Group, a technology consulting firm. "They're everybody. They're in every socioeconomic group," Yankee analyst Fred Voit said of the customers who don't use discount plans. "It's not just people who don't make long-distance phone calls. We have people who make long-distance phone calls who spend a lot of money." Basic-rate customers span all age groups and income levels. Among people who are drawn to technology, 45 percent of those surveyed said they use calling plans, compared with 31 percent of people who don't buy high-tech products until they become commonplace. Yankee says some people probably subscribe to discount plans but don't remember signing up for them. MCI WorldCom and other companies say relatively few of their subscribers pay their highest rates, because most customers choose them to get a break on their rates. AT&T, however, says 60 percent of its customers pay basic rates. "People get so confortable with what they've always done, they don't see any reason for change, and meanwhile they're paying more than they have to," said Nilda Weglarz, a spokeswoman for the nation's largest long-distance provider. "Any AT&T customer who makes long-distance calls should be on a calling plan." AT&T says a substantial number of its subscribers make no long-distance calls. More frequent callers do tend to use calling plans, cutting rates to 15 cents a minute or less. In 1992, 72 percent of residential calling minutes were charged at basic rates. As more callers have switched to calling plans, that's fallen to 25 percent of minutes. Asked why the company doesn't simply lower its rates for other customers, Ms. Weglarz said, "Our research has shown that there is a certain percentage of consumers who do not want to participate in a calling plan for whatever reason they may have. They are simply not interested." Ms. Weglarz says her relatives roll their eyes when she tries to get them to call the phone company and ask for lower rates. "I'm talking about my own family who are college-educated people and I'm saying, `What plan are you on?' and they say, `What?"' But why wouldn't people be interested in saving money? "I believe it falls in the camp of too many options," said Renee Fraser, a consumer psychologist who heads Fraser/Huff advertising in Santa Monica, Calif. AT&T alone offers an array of calling plans that many customers would find confusing. One plan, pitched on television by Mad About You star Paul Reiser, bills calls at 15 cents a minute, all the time. Another plan charges 10 cents a minute, plus a $4.95 monthly fee, with a special promotional rate of 5 cents for weekend calls if customers ask for it. (According to AT&T's Internet site, after a customer has been on the plan for six months, calls on Saturdays will cost 10 cents a minute. Sunday rates are scheduled to rise to 10 cents a minute in mid-November.) Customers can often get lower rates by signing up and receiving bills over the Internet. Other plans offer frequent-flier miles or cash for signing up. Dialing 10-10 and a three-digit code at the beginning of a call saves money sometimes but can cost more on other calls. Monthly fees and fluctuating rates make comparisons difficult. And while there always seems to be a better deal out there, there are plenty of bad ones. "People fail to take action because they believe they have little hope of finding a better solution," Ms. Fraser said. Like Ms. Perl, many customers don't realize that they're paying more than necessary. Others say they believe the savings aren't worth the risk of signing up with a bad plan. And many customers prefer the predictability of the basic service they've always had with AT&T. "There's a bit of loyalty. They've always been here and always provided good service," said one lifelong AT&T customer, who asked not to be identified by name. Winston Brown, a retired technical salesman in Dallas, never thought to check his long-distance rates until he noticed high fees for vacation calls he'd made with his telephone credit card. When he called AT&T to ask about the charges, he realized he'd been overpaying for years. "I felt like I was being ripped off. They must have six plans they can put you on, but you'd never know it," Mr. Brown said. After analyzing his calling patterns and checking with other phone companies, he switched to a plan offered by MCI WorldCom. The Public Utility Commission of Texas compares rates for several Texas phone companies at its Internet site, www.puc.state.tx.us/rates/trates.htm. More help is available from the Telecommunications Research & Action Center, a nonprofit group, at www.trac.org. But customers don't need to be Internet-savvy to find a lower rate, said Leslie Kjellstrand, spokeswoman for the Public Utility Commission. "All you have to do is pick up the phone and say, `What can you do for me?"' ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #2 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Jan 27 20:17:43 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA03920; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 20:17:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 20:17:43 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199901280117.UAA03920@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #3 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 20:18:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 3 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The End of Morse Code? (Danny Burstein) Book Review: "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu (Rob Slade) Pac*Bell ADSL Bandwidth Fraud? (Robert L. McMillin) Book Review: "Just Java", Peter van der Linden (Rob Slade) Waiting For Windows Refund Day (Monty Solomon) A Cell of Your Own? Who Needs a Payphone? (Tad Cook) Why Don't CLID Boxes Do This ... (phs3) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:11:55 EST From: Danny Burstein Subject: The End of Morse Code? (fwd) Nice writeup ... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:48:44 -0800 (PST) From: Jay D. Dyson To: Defcon Stuff Subject: The End of Morse Code? -----BEGIN FORWARDED ARTICLE----- The Economist, Jan. 23, 1999 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ... --- ... .-. .. .--. (SOS, RIP) Morse code is being replaced by a new satellite-based system for sending distress calls at sea. Its dots and dashes have had a good run for their money "Calling all. This is our last cry before our eternal silence." Surprisingly this message, which flashed over the airwaves in the dots and dashes of Morse code on January 31st 1997, was not a desperate transmission by a radio operator on a sinking ship. Rather, it was a message signalling the end of the use of Morse code for distress calls in French waters. Since 1992 countries around the world have been decommissioning their Morse equipment with similar (if less poetic) sign-offs, as the world's shipping switches over to a new satellite- based arrangement, the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System. The final deadline for the switch-over to GMDSS is February 1st, a date that is widely seen as the end of an era. For although dots and dashes will not die out altogether -- they will, for example, continue to be used by amateur radio operators, spies, and some members of the armed forces -- the switch to GMDSS marks the end of the last significant international use of Morse. The code has, however, had a good history. From its origins in 1832, when an American inventor called Samuel Morse first started scribbling in his notebook, it grew to become the global standard for sending messages along wires and, later, over the airwaves. Morse code was, in effect, the network protocol for the world's first Internet: the international telegraph network, whose cables trussed up the globe in the second half of the 19th century. The mother of all networks: Appropriately for a technology commonly associated with radio operators on sinking ships, the idea of Morse code is said to have occurred to Samuel Morse while he was on board a ship crossing the Atlantic. At the time Morse was a painter and occasional inventor, but when another of the ship's passengers informed him of recent advances in electrical theory, Morse was suddenly taken with the idea of building an electric telegraph. Other inventors had been trying to do just that for the best part of a century. Morse succeeded and is now remembered as "the father of the telegraph" partly thanks to his singlemindedness -- it was 12 years, for example, before he secured money from Congress to build his first telegraph line -- but also for technical reasons. Compared with rival electric telegraph designs, such as the needle telegraph developed by William Cooke and Charles Wheatstone in Britain, Morse's design was very simple: it required little more than a "key" (essentially, a spring-loaded switch) to send messages, a clicking "sounder" to receive them, and a wire to link the two. But although Morse's hardware was simple, there was a catch: in order to use his equipment, operators had to learn the special code of dots and dashes that still bears his name. Originally, Morse had not intended to use combinations of dots and dashes to represent individual letters. His first code, sketched in his notebook during that transatlantic voyage, used dots and dashes to represent the digits 0 to 9. Morse's idea was that messages would consist of strings of numbers corresponding to words and phrases in a special numbered dictionary. But Morse later abandoned this scheme and, with the help of an associate, Alfred Vail, devised the Morse alphabet, which could be used to spell out messages a letter at a time in dots and dashes. At first, the need to learn this complicated-looking code made Morse's telegraph seem impossibly tricky compared with other, more user-friendly designs. Cooke's and Wheatstone's telegraph, for example, used five needles to pick out letters on a diamond-shaped grid. But although this meant that anyone could use it, it also required five wires between telegraph stations. Morse's telegraph needed only one. And some people, it soon transpired, had a natural facility for Morse code. As electric telegraphy took off in the early 1850s, the Morse telegraph quickly became dominant. It was adopted as the European standard in 1851, allowing direct connections between the telegraph networks of different countries. (Britain chose not to participate, sticking with needle telegraphs for a few more years.) By this time Morse code had been revised to allow for accents and other foreign characters, resulting in a split between American and International Morse that continues to this day. On international submarine cables, left and right swings of a light-beam reflected from a tiny rotating mirror were used to represent dots and dashes. Meanwhile a distinct telegraphic subculture was emerging, with its own customs and vocabulary, and a hierarchy based on the speed at which operators could send and receive Morse code. First-class operators, who could send and receive at speeds of up to 45 words a minute, handled press traffic, securing the best-paid jobs in big cities. At the bottom of the pile were slow, inexperienced rural operators, many of whom worked the wires as part-timers. As their Morse code improved, however, rural operators found that their new-found skill was a passport to better pay in a city job. Telegraphers soon swelled the ranks of the emerging middle classes. Telegraphy was also deemed suitable work for women. By 1870, a third of the operators in the Western Union office in New York, the largest telegraph office in America, were female. Just as skilled operators found that they could recognise each other over the wires from their style of Morse code, many operators claimed to be able to recognise women operators. Inevitably, romances were initiated over the wires -- just as they are today by e-mail. There were even a handful of weddings by telegraph. In a dramatic ceremony in 1871, Morse himself said goodbye to the global community of telegraphers he had brought into being. After a lavish banquet and many adulatory speeches, Morse sat down behind an operator's table and, placing his finger on a key connected to every telegraph wire in America, tapped out his final farewell to a standing ovation. By the time of his death in 1872, the world was well and truly wired: more than 650,000 miles of telegraph line and 30,000 miles of submarine cable were throbbing with Morse code; and 20,000 towns and villages were connected to the global network. Just as the Internet is today often called an "information superhighway", the telegraph was described in its day as an "instantaneous highway of thought". But by the 1890s the Morse telegraph's heyday as a cutting-edge technology was coming to an end, with the invention of the telephone and the rise of automatic telegraphs, precursors of the teleprinter, neither of which required specialist skills to operate. Morse code, however, was about to be given a new lease of life thanks to another new technology: wireless. Following the invention of radiotelegraphy by Guglielmo Marconi in 1896, its potential for use at sea quickly became apparent. For the first time, ships could communicate with each other, and with the shore, whatever the weather and even when out of visual range. In 1897 Marconi successfully sent Morse code messages between a shore station and an Italian warship 19km (12 miles) away. The first sea rescue after a distress call sent by radiotelegraph took place in 1899, when a lightship in the Dover Straits reported the grounding of Elbe, a steamship. Two years later, Marconi sent the first transatlantic radio signal: three dots, the letter "S" in Morse code. By 1910, Morse radio equipment was commonplace on ships. The sinking of the Titanic in 1912, however, highlighted the need for radio operators to listen at all times for distress signals. After the disaster it emerged that the liner Californian had been only a few miles away, and that hundreds of lives might have been saved had the Californian's radio operator been on duty and so able to receive the Titanic's "SOS" distress call. At the first International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), held in London in 1914, it was agreed that large vessels should maintain 24-hour radio watch. This rule has remained ever since, with subsequent SOLAS conventions gradually introducing new rules to keep pace with the development of technologies such as radiotelephony. The advent of satellite technology led the International Maritime Organisation to amend the SOLAS convention in 1988 to introduce GMDSS, an automated emergency communications system based on satellite and radio links. Optional since 1992, GMDSS equipment will be compulsory worldwide from February 1st on all ships that exceed 300 tonnes, carry 12 or more passengers, or travel in international waters. (Owners of smaller vessels can install the equipment if they wish.) Under GMDSS, anyone on board a ship in distress merely has to press a button to send a distress call containing the vessel's identification number and its precise location -- there is no need for a skilled Morse operator. And so, after nearly 170 years, Morse code will finally slip beneath the waves. Over and out: As communications protocols go, Morse has lasted a surprisingly long time - -- admittedly with a few tweaks here and there. So how might its modern descendant, the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), fare in comparison? TCP/IP was devised in 1973 by Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf (a man with Morse-like stature in the Internet world who is often known as the "father of the Internet"). As with Morse code before it, TCP/IP is being improved to respond to new challenges and technologies. Its addressing system is now being overhauled to make room for billions of additional connections, to allow for the wireless devices expected to proliferate over coming years and to enable even household appliances to go online. Mr Cerf is also working on how to extend the Internet to such other places as the moon and Mars, since the time delays as radio signals travel through space make the current protocol unsuitable. Further improvements will follow: indeed, since it is spoken by computers, not humans, TCP/IP is easier to adapt than was Morse. Even so, in today's fast-changing computer world, it seems unlikely that TCP/IP will remain in continuous use for anything like as long as the century and a half managed by Morse code, its distant digital ancestor. - ----- END FORWARDED ARTICLE ----- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My sincere thanks to Danny for sending along this really great bit of history for the Digest. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:43:27 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKDNSBND.RVW 981115 "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu, 1998, 1-56592-512-2, U$32.95/C$46.95 %A Paul Albitz %A Cricket Liu %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1998 %G 1-56592-512-2 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$32.95/C$46.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 520 p. %T "DNS and BIND", 3rd ed. Of the millions of users on the Internet, almost all are blissfully unaware of the complexity and magnitude of the task of network routing. How does the network know where to deliver a piece of email? In fact, given the packet nature of all Internet traffic, how do telnet or ftp packets get, reliably and generally quickly, to their destination? Few even recognize the term DNS, the Domain Name Service, which handles the problem. Administrators may have used BIND, the Berkeley Internet Name Domain program, to manage DNS, but may not fully understand the importance, use or finer aspects of it. This book gives both background and operational details. Topics covered include background of the system, an explanation of the workings of DNS, how to get BIND and a domain name, setting up BIND, DNS and email, configuring hosts, maintaining BIND, modifying domains, creation of subdomains, advanced features and security, nslookup, BIND debugging messages, troubleshooting, the Resolver and Name Server Library routines, as well as miscellaneous other information. Given the nature of the network routing problem, a full understanding of DNS likely requires actual hands-on work. Albitz and Liu have, however, put together clear, straightforward, and sometimes even lighthearted text to make the learning process as painless as possible. The book also covers more advanced topics than straightforward routing administration. Bind 8.1.2 is the basic version for the book, but it also looks back to Bind 4.8.3 and 4.9.x because of the number of shipping products that may still be based on those. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995, 1997, 1998 BKDNSBND.RVW 981115 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 06:53:10 -0800 From: Robert L. McMillin Organization: Syseca, Inc. Subject: Pac*Bell ADSL Bandwidth Fraud? Pac*Bell's ADSL offerings have been so far really exciting: quite inexpensive, and widely deployed (for an initial rollout). However, I just heard something from an ISP friend of mine that is making me really jittery about buying: according to him, Pac*Bell is concentrating their ADSL lines back at DS3 junctions, and rather heavily overloading these. This, obviously, is a bid to keep the price of ADSL down. However, some users are reporting speeds as low as 10 kb/s during peak usage times because of this. That is, you'd be better off using a conventional dial-up ISP with any flavor of analog modem. Has anyone else heard of this story? Robert L. McMillin | Not the voice of Syseca, Inc. | rlm@syseca-us.com Personal: rlm@helen.surfcty.com | rlm@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:07:45 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Just Java", Peter van der Linden Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKJSJAVA.RVW 990108 "Just Java", Peter van der Linden, 1999, 0-13-010534-1, U$44.99/C$63.00 %A Peter van der Linden pvdl@best.com %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1998 %G 0-13-010534-1 %I Prentice Hall %O U$44.99/C$63.00 201-236-7139 fax: 201-236-7131 %P 776 p. + CD-ROM %S SunSoft Press Java Series %T "Just Java 1.2, fourth edition" Huh. Back to the original, and somewhat inaccurate, title. This book is a fairly clear introduction to Java. The material is accessible to the non-programmer, albeit with some dedication. The content is fast paced, so you may need to go over some sections several times. But it isn't *just* Java. Oh, no. The jokes start on the *dedication* page. I am saddened by the loss of the "World's Best" Rolls-Royce, the waterbomb-carrying paper airplane, and the amusing but painfully realistic look at getting connected to the Internet, but the table of easily misunderstood error messages and things learned on the Internet are still there. I guess as the book grows, something has to give. Chapter one looks at the what and why of Java. Chapter two goes a long way, although perhaps not all the way, to explaining object- oriented programming. (Chapter six adds to it.) This section is perhaps best appreciated by C programmers, although it does a fair amount of demystifying of object terminology. The structure of the book has been reorganized, making it less sectional. The chapters form a more standard, sequential tutorial on Java, covering the basics, keywords, types, names, arrays, operators. classes, statements, interfaces, packages, threads, applets, security, libraries, GUI, containers, the AWT (Abstract Window Toolkit), graphics, file I/O, and networking. But I must also talk about the CD-ROM. Generally I don't, since many authors simply throw on a few megs of shareware or RFCs, which may or may not have a bearing on the topic of the book. Not our Peter. First off, there is over 500 megabytes on the CD, filling it almost completely. The Java 1.2 JDK (Java Development Kit) wasn't ready in time for the book, but it has the older versions for WinNT/9x, Mac, Solaris, Linux, and so forth. (Don't have Linux? It's got that too.) Or, if you'd rather program in Perl, ada, Fortran, C, or Eiffel, it can help you too. Plus FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions lists), sample code, games, the paper airplane (animated), Sherlock Holmes stories, the Magna Carta, the Jargon File, and a new and different Rolls story. The directory structure may not be immediately obvious to all, but then, that's what grep is for. Also, the link to the book (the CD is navigable via browser) off the main page doesn't seem to work, but that's what the "Go" box is for. So, while it may or may not be the world's best tutorial on Java, it is definitely the most enjoyable. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 - 1999 BKJSJAVA.RVW 990108 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 13:39:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Waiting for Windows Refund Day http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17442.html Waiting for Windows Refund Day by Chris Oakes 2:10 p.m. 20.Jan.99.PST If you don't use Windows, why should you pay for it? That's the logic driving a group of Linux users who want to make good on a tiny clause built into the Windows end-user license. The clause offers a refund to PC owners who buy a computer preloaded with Windows 98, but don't use the operating system. If it gathers steam, their effort could lead to legal action requiring Microsoft and PC vendors to make it easier to opt out of using the Windows OS on their PCs. "I'm hoping in the long run we'll be able to pressure Microsoft to change their OEM contracts," said Matt Jensen a participant in the effort and webmaster for the Windows Refund Center. The site will coordinate and track efforts to obtain refunds from users' respective PC manufacturers. The movement ramped up Tuesday, and the grassroots group has set aside 15 February as Windows Refund Day when those seeking to uninstall Windows from their PCs will send out their letters. Jensen and others are contributing ideas to the Refund Center following the news of an Australian PC owner's effort to obtain a refund for his copy of Windows. Discussion of Geoffrey Bennett's saga began on Slashdot , a site popular with users of the alternative PC operating system Linux. Attorney Erwin Shustak, chief litigator of securities and corporate finance at the law firm Shustak, Jalil, & Heller, said Bennett's effort may not lead to immediate, dramatic consequences, but could give rise to an eventual class-action lawsuit. Microsoft and PC makers "had a contract that clearly said what [users] were entitled to do, and yet they didn't honor the contract," Shustak said of Bennett's story. "They made it extremely difficult for him to obtain what he was supposed to obtain. I believe it was an illusory clause; they had no procedure sent up to honor it." The Microsoft Windows End-User License Agreement, or EULA, that accompanies the IBM ThinkPad reads, "If you do not agree to the terms of this EULA, PC manufacturer and Microsoft are unwilling to license the software product to you. In such an event ... you should promptly contact PC manufacturer for instructions on a return of the unused product(s) for a refund." Microsoft could not immediately be reached for comment. Full story to follow. Copyright ) 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ Subject: A Cell of Your Own? Who Needs a Pay Phone? Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 00:00:18 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) -- Some of the toughest new restrictions in California could be sounding last call for pay phones in neighborhoods where people need them most. This Orange County city this month joined a growing number of towns enacting ordinances threatening removal of thousands of streetside phones: nuisances to some people who have phones of their own; lifelines to people who can't afford one. "I wish they were all yanked out," said Debbie McEwen, who complains that the phone booth near her Santa Ana home is plagued by graffiti, cigarette butts and loiterers. "They're magnets. People hang out all day and all night." As cellular telephones become standard equipment for those who can afford them, pay phones continue to proliferate thanks to federal deregulation. But Santa Ana and other communities are beginning to see them as eyesores. Critics complain many newer pay phones are poorly maintained, and many people are put off by the ads they display. Santa Ana's measure has angered pay phone owners who say they will be forced to remove most of the city's 1,500 outdoor phones. Officials say the phones have spread so rapidly it's uncertain how many have been installed; many new ones lack the required permits. Statewide, the number of pay phones has increased by nearly 65,000 to about 265,000 since 1990, according to Public Utilities Commission figures. Practically all the new phones were installed by independent companies. Santa Ana's ordinance does not target specific phones for removal. It establishes strict rules the owners say will make it too costly to change and operate the phones. The ordinance limits the amount of exposed conduit connecting phone lines to booths and bans the use of exposed wires connecting a pay phone to overhead lines. Of the 300 phones Pacific Bell has in the city, about 210 would not comply with the new ordinance, Pacific Bell executive Tom Weber said. "It's not just my pay phones in Santa Ana I'm worried about. It's my 930 phones I have in Southern California," said owner Ken Scott, president of San Diego Pay Phone Owners Association. "If this takes off in other cities, it's going to be a mess out there, and it's a mess that doesn't need to happen." The owners have vowed to fight the proposed law, saying it punishes the entire industry for the sins of a few irresponsible operators. But reducing pay phones seems to be the trend across the country, the {Los Angeles Times} reported Monday. Some older ordinances were aimed at drug dealing and prostitution, but communities are increasingly focusing on aesthetics. -- In California, Huntington Park bans pay phones on private property in its business district, a law that is being challenged by the telephone industry; -- Preservationists in New York are fighting plans to add nearly 20,000 public phones across the city, fearful the booths will block views of historic landmarks; -- In downtown Perth Amboy, N.J., booths are prohibited within 600 feet of each other; -- Chicago officials have removed thousands of pay phones outside stores. Besides complaints from phone owners that Santa Ana's landmark law infringes on their rights, the prospect of removing booths has also sparked safety concerns. Community activists point out that one-third of all 911 calls in Santa Ana come from pay phones. Jack Elwir, owner of H&H Liquor Store on Civic Center Drive, said the three phones outside his businesses are used regularly by people making calls to family in Mexico. "A lot of customers don't have phones -- or even cars," he said. Until recently, Claudia Vasquez said the phone outside her home was her main link to friends and family because she didn't have the identification to get her own. She recently got the problem straightened out and had a line installed. "They can't remove the phones," Vasquez said. "People use them all the time." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The two COCOTS of mine which readers will recall me discussing about a year ago when I had them put in for the benefit of the bus riders and had them programmed for extremely low and fair rates wound up getting vandalized so much that I was going to have them removed entirely, however the company which services them for me suggested a few improvements, including the latest vandal- proof technology. They put in two new phones which appear to be almost impossible to vandalize. They have some sort of heavy metal across the front, and a thing at the top where coins go in that prevent 'stuffing' the coin slot with string and other things designed to capture the coins people insert. When I started getting at least one complaint each day about the old phones, I called and asked them to find some solution. The new phones sort of look like the type of phone installed for prisoner use in jails, etc. Let's see these get vandalized! PAT] ------------------------------ From: p.h.s.3@watvm.uwaterloo.ca (phs3) Subject: Why Don't CLID Boxes do This ... Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 03:56:16 GMT Organization: Remove dots from userid portion to reply .. or do they? Since we got CLID, we find that we use it a lot as a telephone directory for numbers of folks for which we have a short-term need. For example, my daughter is off to a friend's house for the afternoon; in negotiating the visit, her parents have probably called our house, so their number is on the box. Far easier to scroll back to find it than to look it up. After the visit, we don't need the number for days/weeks/months/ever again, so we don't care. Now, that works fine. What happens, though, is that we wind up spending a certain amount of time "maintaining" the box -- deleting OUT OF AREA, PRIVATE CALL, and 'boring' numbers such as my office # when I call home (which appears as the office switchboard number, thus not even being useful if my wife didn't know my number by heart). If we don't do this, then numbers which we *do* want kept -- my sister-in-law's second line, neighbor's cell number, etc., scroll off and are lost. So...we would love a CLID box which allowed: - defining numbers as "nuisance" numbers, to be kept until reviewed, then deleted either immediately, the next time a call comes in, or just first when the box fills up; - the ability to "lock" numbers, much as my pager allows, so they won't scroll off; - a "delete duplicates", so the 15 calls back & forth about the visit to the friend's house don't waste space in the box. Anyone heard of such a beast? Or are CLID boxes such a commodity that features aren't worth the trouble? Yeah, we could do this with a PC, but we're not likely to put one at each phone ... Cheers, ..phsiii ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #3 **************************** Subject: TELECOM Digest V19_#4 TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 22:34:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 4 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Internet Security", Meyers/Sheldon/Snyder (Rob Slade) Caller-ID and International Calls (John Cagnola) UCLA Short Course on "Communication Systems Using Digital Signal (Goodin) TV Site Reveals Personal Data (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "Stopping Spam", Alan Schwartz/Simson Garfinkel(Rob Slade) Keeping Tabs on Sex Offenders (Monty Solomon) Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell (David Leibold) Cell Phone Glitch Jams Thousands (Mike Pollock) Re: Book Review: "The Internet Complete Reference", H.Hahn (John R Levine) Re: Ameritech's New Call-Blocking Service Is Too Costly (Rick R. Cox) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 00:57:05 GMT Subject: Book Review: "Internet Security", Tim Meyers/Tom Sheldon/Joel Snyder Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINSECR.RVW 981115 "Internet Security", Tim Meyers/Tom Sheldon/Joel Snyder, 1997, 1-56205-760-X, U$65.00/C$91.95/UK#61.49 %A Tim Meyers %A Tom Sheldon %A Joel Snyder %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 1997 %G 1-56205-760-X %I Macmillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$65.00/C$91.95/UK#61.49 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 info@mcp.com %P 916 p. + CD-ROM %T "Internet Security: Professional Reference", 2nd ed. "Internet" and "security" are two items of great interest, so I guess someone had to write this book. However, I wish it had been someone willing to put some thought into it. Internet security is a complex and many-facetted field, and the narrow views presented here don't come close to doing it justice. Part one is supposed to be about managing Internet security, but it mostly contains a grab bag of background information on the net, with fairly large gaps in the coverage. Chapter one looks at IP addressing and domains, with a mixed lot of UNIX commands related to the net. Some daemon processes are listed in chapter two, along with some discussion of writing your own with shell scripts or Perl, and twenty pages of program listings. A number of UUCP programs are overviewed in chapter three. Some UNIX, NT, and DOS auditing programs and utilities are listed in chapter four. Part two looks at access security. Sniffing and spoofing are reviewed in chapter five, but the sections on protection may be less than helpful. Chapter six is supposed to tell you how to build a firewall. It does list a large number of UNIX utilities related to the function, but this might have been more useful if there had first been even the most token attempt to explain what a firewall was, and the different types and functions. There is a basic explanation in chapter seven, but aimed primarily at evaluation of commercial firewall products. Chapter eight is a very detailed exploration of SATAN (Security Administrator Tool for Analyzing Networks), covering the basic concept of looking for your own holes, a number of tools that look for specific holes, detection tools to note probing attempts, and the operation of SATAN itself. There is a detailed description of Kerberos exchange messages in chapter nine. Part three purports to be about the security of messaging, but seems to be limited to encryption of content. Chapter ten gives the usual, banal introduction to encryption, using examples of old, outmoded substitution ciphers, and never realistically discussing algorithm or key strength, nor key management. Chapter eleven is a rewrite of the documentation for PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) 2.6.2. Part four lumps together four topics under the heading of "modern concerns." Some Windows NT security features are discussed in chapter twelve, but not in much detail. (In fact, the chapter is entitled "Windows NT Internet Security" but doesn't have much to say about the Internet at all.) Chapter thirteen looks at Java, but the security content seems to relate strictly to the bytecode verifier and the applet "sandbox," and doesn't have much detail on those topics. CGI (Common Gateway Interface) security for Web forms gets a very terse review in chapter fourteen. After all of the foregoing, I was pleasantly astounded to find that the virus information, in chapter fifteen, is quite good. The explanation of how viruses work is extremely thorough, and the description of the different types of antiviral software is solid. The recommendations for recovery are not quite as good (FDISK can create more trouble than the virus you are trying to get rid of) and the review of Windows NT is rather optimistic. There are rather massive holes in the coverage presented in this book. The heavy UNIX concentration is only one example, but there are whole subjects not even mentioned. On the other hand, great chunks of the material contained in these pages have only the most tenuous connection to either the Internet or security. While there are some good bits that might justify the purchase of this book for experts, by no means can it be recommended as a sole source, or even an introduction. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKINSECR.RVW 981115 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: John.Cagnol@sophia.nospam.inria.fr Subject: Caller-id and International Calls Date: 27 Jan 1999 10:58:10 +0100 Organization: I.N.R.I.A Sophia-Antipolis (France) Hi, When I get an incoming international call, my phone company now displays "PRIVATE" on my caller-id instead of "OUT-OF-AREA" as they used to. They have been arguing, over the past month, that both "PRIVATE" and "OUT-OF-AREA" are normal behavior of the system, it just depends on the route of the call. I believed "OUT-OF-AREA" means "the network doesn't know the number" while "PRIVATE" means "the caller blocked his number so you're not going to get it". I am looking for any information to back up that belief. Is there any ITU recommendation describing what the telco should display on CID for international calls? Any help would be appreciated. John Cagnol Please remove .nospam out of my email address Usual disclaimer applies ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Communication Systems Using Digital Signal" Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 00:08:27 GMT On April 5-9, 1999, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Communication Systems Using Digital Signal Processing", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Bernard Sklar, PhD, Communications Engineering Services, and frederick harris, MS, Professor, Electrical and Computer Engineering, San Diego State University. As part of the course materials, each participant receives a copy of the text, "Digital Communications: Fundamentals and Applications", by Bernard Sklar. This course provides comprehensive coverage of digital communications. It differs from other communications courses in its emphasis on applying modern digital signal processing techniques to the implementation of communication systems. This makes the course essential for practitioners in this rapidly changing field. Error-correction coding, spread spectrum techniques, and bandwidth-efficient signaling are all discussed in detail. Basic digital signaling methods and the newest modulation-with-memory techniques are described. Many traditional communication applications such as modulation/demod- ulation, channelization, channel equalization, synchronization, and frequency synthesis are being implemented with new digital signal processing techniques to achieve high performance. The course analyzes these techniques, including multirate filters, I-Q sampling, and conversion between I-Q and real signals. UCLA Extension has presented this highly successful short course since 1990. The course fee is $1595, which includes the text and extensive course notes. These course materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/ This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 13:41:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TV Site Reveals Personal Data http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17437.html TV Site Reveals Personal Data by James Glave 12:05 p.m. 20.Jan.99.PST In an apparent online privacy snafu, approximately 600 Ohio residents found their personal information posted on the Web site of their local Fox television affiliate Wednesday. The names, home addresses, emails, and comments appeared in a publicly accessible text file on the Web site for WRGT Fox 45 until Wednesday morning. Station employees said it was the work of a cracker, but the individuals who claimed to have discovered the page attribute the mix-up to inept programming. "Fox's blatant incompetence in dealing with this matter reflects a media we've come to expect (especially Fox): sloppy, irresponsible, and arrogant," read an email sent to the 600 email addresses in the file from an organization calling itself Black Flag. In the email, Black Flag claimed to have discovered the file after examining a script on the site that processed the results of viewer feedback. The group said that the script spooled the submitted comments and personal data to a publicly accessible file. The script has since been removed. "We immediately informed Fox 45 of this gross violation of privacy through repeated faxes and messages," the message continued. "While they took the submission form down, the file remained for anyone with Internet access to see.... After repeatedly failing to make progress with Fox, we decided to email all the other people at risk." WRGT-TV promotions director Mike Hanson said he had not heard from Black Flag, or seen any faxes. He accused the group of cracking the site, stealing the data, and creating the page. "We feel like we got hit in the back of the head," said Hanson, who claimed that Black Flag had changed his password so that he could not access his site. "They come along and they mess with this info, and then they send a mass mailing, so here we are in this whirlwind." "There was no fax, no email, no person. No one has heard anything about it," Hanson said. Hanson said that he recently assumed authority over the site from the previous webmaster, who died. John Gwen of Modern Technologies, the site's current webmaster, could not be reached for comment. A search of the file by Wired News uncovered 657 individual email addresses. The page was removed from the site at about 9:25 a.m. PST. "It's the bad people who have privacy issues, and we didn't have a clue," said Hanson. Black Flag did not respond to emails from Wired News. "We are going to talk to our server [contact] and see what options we have to make sure this isn't going to happen in the future," Hanson said. "The average state of security at Web sites is appallingly low and people generally, even with a site with a privacy policy, have very little recourse," said Jason Catlett, a data privacy expert and CEO of Junkbusters. "A law, like most countries have, that would provide statutory damages of $100 to $500 would give sites a financial incentive to make sure they get it right," said Catlett. In December, the Web site for CBS SportsLine inadvertently exposed 9 megabytes worth of personal data from consumers who had entered contests on the site. "How many more times does this specific privacy violation have to occur before something is done to protect people?" asked Catlett. Copyright ) 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 11:44:23 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Stopping Spam", Alan Schwartz/Simson Garfinkel Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKSTPSPM.RVW 981030 "Stopping Spam", Alan Schwartz/Simson Garfinkel, 1998, 1-56592-388-X, U$19.95/C$29.95 %A Alan Schwartz alansz@araw.mede.uic.edu %A Simson Garfinkel simsong@vineyard.net %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1998 %G 1-56592-388-X %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$19.95/C$29.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 208 p. %T "Stopping Spam" Eternal vigilance is the price of junk free email. Therefore, readers expecting to find a quick fix for spam in this book are possibly going to be disappointed. Those who persevere, however, will find much useful material that is both interesting, and valuable in the fight against unsolicited and commercial mass mail bombing. Chapter one details the problem with a definition of spam, the functionally differing types of spam, the different intention of spam (including reputation attacks), and the reasons why spam should be combatted, rather than merely tolerated and deleted. A historical background to the situation is provided in chapter two. This includes mention of viral programs (plus a repetition of the myth that CHRISTMA EXEC caused a mass shutdown of VNET). the primary emphasis, though, is on the Green Card Lawyers, Cyberpromotions, and others of that ilk. (A warning against vigilante actions is also germane.) The current position is described very briefly in chapter three. Groups of spammers and spamming tools are noted. (Perhaps the authors do not want to give anyone ideas, but the technology section is very terse indeed.) In closing, a nightmare future spam scenario is provided. Chapter four provides a solid technical background for further discussion of spam, covering mail agents and the mail and news protocols. A number of steps that the average computer user can take are listed in chapter five. The range from hiding your identity or preventing address "harvesting" (not all the suggestions are convenient), to the more active detecting of spammers behind spoofing techniques, and reporting to authorities. Similar advice for newsgroups is given in chapter six, emphasizing specific programs like NoCeM. Chapter seven moves into larger areas of responsibility with advice on both policy and practical configuration settings to reduce both incoming and outgoing spam. The larger net community is addressed in chapter eight. An appendix lists a wide variety of resources, but the annotations may not always give you the complete picture. For example, the Spam Media Tracker Web site is listed, but at a relatively old address. This, of course, happens all the time on the net, but it is stranger that there is no mention of the spam-news mailing list, the original (and ongoing) source for the site. It would, or course, be prohibitive to identify all international agencies dealing with spam. However, do note that only US government offices are noted as departments to report to. While understandable, the tone of moral outrage that colours the initial chapters may not be as helpful as a calmer precis. As the book hits its stride, though, it provides a good deal of helpful and useful information. All ISPs (Internet Service Providers), corporate network administrators, and net help desks should have a copy of this reference handy. Any serious Internet user will also find it well worth the price. As the authors put it, in slightly different words, the only thing necessary for the triumph of spammers is that good users do nothing. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKSTPSPM.RVW 981030 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.html Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 15:08:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Keeping Tabs on Sex Offenders http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/17345.html Keeping Tabs on Sex Offenders by Jill Priluck 2:00 p.m. 14.Jan.99.PST In a move that has raised more than a few eyebrows among civil libertarians, the state of Texas on Wednesday began allowing consumers to search its Web site to see if any convicted sex offenders live nearby. For the price of a bagel and coffee -- a mere US$3.15 -- the Texas Registered Sex Offender page allows users to search for sex offenders by ZIP code, name, sex, race, and date of birth. "The site makes the information more available so that people can know what sex offenders are in their neighborhoods," said Charlene Cain, program analyst for the Texas Department of Public Safety. The page, developed and maintained by Austin-based MicroAssist, now stores about 29,000 sex offender records compiled from police departments, sheriff's offices, and other law enforcement agencies. The new data supplements the more than 3 million criminal convictions that the site has made available since June 1998. Civil liberties advocates worry about the larger privacy implications of such registries. "Providing absolute publicity calls into question the attempts in Megan's Law to limit the dissemination of stigmatizing information," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "The offender becomes the scarlet letter of Hawthorne's New England." Megan's Law passed as part of the 1994 Crime Bill and requires states to enact regulations requiring violent sex offenders to register with law enforcement agencies. Local officials are permitted to alert communities if a registered sex offender is living in the neighborhood. The law is named for Megan Kanka, a 7-year-old New Jersey girl who was raped and killed in 1994 by a repeat sex offender living across the street. In August 1997, a federal appeals court upheld the law, arguing that it did not violate the double jeopardy clause, which says that a person cannot be punished more than once for the same crime. Unlike communication notification laws, which limit the dissemination of sex offender information, Rotenberg noted that online criminal records are borderless. "The geographic specificity that Megan's Law presupposes simply doesn't carry over to the interspecificity that the Internet makes possible," said Rotenberg. "The general argument is that this is a second punishment and is stigmatizing for people who have served time for a crime committed," he said. "There's a certain amount of vigilantism, when for example someone lists the wrong address." The database includes a caveat, warning that users should confirm any information with the Department of Public Safety. "The implications in Texas is that we're starting to catch up with the rest of the country by shredding the shroud of secrecy and giving families and citizens the option of finding out who's residing in their neighborhoods," said Andy Kahn of the Mayor's Crime Victims Office in Houston. According to Carol Dorris, staff attorney at the National Center for Victims of Crime, government bodies are increasingly publicizing information about criminals. "But whether somebody in London needs to know, I don't know," Dorris said. In Harris County, there was a 13 percent increase in adult sex offenders. The number of child molesters released in 1998 more than doubled. Copyright ) 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are some sex offense cases involving children -- and older teens as well -- which are so horrible to contemplate that any efforts made to provide community notification should be welcomed. Megan is one such example, as was little Adam Walch in Florida several years ago; and who can forget the hideous event in Petaluma, California a few years ago involving the young lady whose body was mutilated? As an aside, in that case the City of Petaluma *nearly went bankrupt* in their expenditure of tax funds supporting the police in their efforts to apprehend and convict the man who was responsible for the ugly crime. The City of Petaluma authorities went way 'over budget' but said they would not stop until there was full and complete closure for the victim and her family, and the entire community supported the decision to borrow money to keep the city operating when it went in the red financially as a result. I guess Polly Klas is recovering, as best one might. God bless her and her family. Adam Walch's father started a national database for missing children, and Megan was the impetus for the controversial sex registry now implemented in every state. Do I support sex-offender databases which are open to public view? That's a tough call. I fully and completely support the internet and freedom of information. But I feel it should contain information only on serious crimes of a sexual nature and not every minor 'offense' which happens along. In some states, the law provides for registration upon conviction for such things as lewd conduct in a place where the offender(s) only real 'crime' was being indiscrete in their choice of location and/or proposed partner, etc. Listing that sort of 'crime' does nothing except appeal to the prurient interests of the person examining the database. Here in the Chicago area, both the City of Chicago and the County of Cook have their databases on the net for view, although the user has to jump through some hoops to get any information out of it. One has to first identify the ward/precinct in question, then go through *hundreds* (yes, that many!) of names trying to match them up with streets (and the number on the street is not given). Naturally when they started them up for public view, the newspapers gave it full coverage including the URL for each. No details of the crime are given. But why a sex offender database and not one for shoplifters, bank robbers and car thieves? Maybe all criminal records everywhere should be easily accessible, then we could toss out once and for all the idea that a penitentiary is a place to become penitent and that people do redeem themselves and change their lives for the better. Maybe it is because all of us at some time or another in our lives come to the kinds of acts which would cause one to be listed. I used to have a neighbor who was employed by the Cook County Department of Corrections. His days were spent sitting at an 'intake desk' at the jail processing in hundreds of new inmates daily. I once asked him, did you ever stop to think about how easy it would be to f--- up and find yourself seated on the wrong side of that desk you work at? His first response was a defensive one; he did not want to talk about it. Later he said to me, yeah, he had thought about it. I sit where I do and they sit where they do for one reason only, the grace of God. They got caught, I and many of my co-workers have not. That simple. So you support the idea of a sex offender database? Well, good. Maybe we will see you listed there some day when your filthy laundry gets hung out to dry. And don't say it can't happen to you; it can quite easily. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 11:34:12 EST From: David Leibold Subject: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell {The Toronto Star} 16 January 1999 featured a story on Bell Canada's plans to scrap its own operator service and have the U.S. based Excell provide operator services in the future. Article can be found (at least for a short time) on the Star's website, www.thestar.ca, and specifically was found at: News Story: Last call for operators - January 16, 1999 http://www.thestar.ca/thestar/editorial/news/990116NEW02b_CI-BELL16.html ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: Cell Phone Glitch Jams Thousands Date: Wed 27 Jan 1999 22:39:32 -0500 Maine man's cell phone jams tens of thousands of calls CRYSTAL RIVER, Fla. (AP) - When the mysterious white car with tinted windows and a small satellite dish on top pulled up to Calvin Simpson's motor home, the retired engineer was puzzled. ``I thought, ``What are those guys doing?' Then they came up to me, and I said, ``Uh-oh.' '' The men, engineers for GTE Wireless, had found their culprit, tracking a technological glitch to Simpson's cellular phone. For 10 days, Simpson unwittingly had been jamming cellular service for tens of thousands of customers in Citrus and Hernando counties. GTE Wireless customers in west Citrus and Hernando began having trouble with their phones on Jan. 4 - the same day Simpson brought his motor home to the Crystal Isle RV Resort for the winter from his home in South Portland, Maine. The glitch tied up GTE Wireless customer service representatives and confounded the engineers, who are still not entirely sure what caused the problem. Engineers think Simpson's phone was constantly transmitting signals to a ``set-up channel'' on a cellular phone tower behind Crystal River's City Hall. The channel is supposed to take signals and relay them to their destinations. Simpson's phone, however, sent signals to the channel even when he wasn't trying to make a call. Whenever his phone was on, the constant signal prevented any cellular phone user from making a call via that tower. Any GTE Wireless customer traveling through the Crystal River area in the 10-day period was likely affected. And if the Simpsons had taken a road trip with their cellular phone turned on, engineers think they would have temporarily blacked out any cellular phone tower along the way. GTE Wireless spent days in Crystal River trying to figure out what was causing the outage before tracking the faulty signal to Simpson's cellular phone. They used the same technology cellular phone companies use to track stolen cell phones. Once they found Simpson on Wednesday, they simply asked him to turn off his cell phone. Bingo. That did it. Like magic, GTE Wireless was back in service in Crystal River. ``When I pulled the plug, they had a big sigh of relief,'' Simpson said. The engineers who tracked him down got Simpson a new cell phone. The company plans to take Simpson's old, faulty phone apart in hopes of finding out exactly what it was that went wrong. Ron Proleika, a Tampa-based spokesman for GTE Wireless, said he plans to tell cellular industry trade magazines about the problem because he thinks the unusual defect may be the first of its kind. Proleika would not reveal just how many customers GTE Wireless has in the area, but estimated the number of people affected by the 10-day outage was in the ``tens of thousands.'' ------------------------------ Date: 27 Jan 1999 18:00:55 -0000 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Book Review: "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > "The Internet Complete Reference", Harley Hahn, 1996, 0-07-882138-X, > U$32.95/C$47.95 FYI, this three-year-old book is now out of print. There's a new 1999 version, completely rewritten from scratch by my sister and others, that should be available in the next month or two. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Rick.R.Cox@ait4.ameritech.com (Rick Cox) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 10:28:50 -0500 Subject: Re: Ameritech's New Call-Blocking Service Is Too Costly I would like to relate my personal experience with this feature. While it's true that I am an Ameritech employee, I can say without reservation that I would pay full price for this feature anyway. I wouldn't mind if it cost less, but it's worth the current price. For years my household has been deluged with calls from telemarketers, companies doing surveys, etc. In all seriousness, we would be subjected to an average of ten calls per day. I have done the "Do not call here, take me off your list" routine several times. But there are hundreds of companies out there. Some want donations. Some want to sell me something. Some want my opinion. I don't want to talk to any of them. And the thought of having to individually tell each of them to leave me alone is daunting to say the least. Now I get, maybe, two calls per month from those people. My serenity has been restored. And I get Caller ID with Name as part of the package. I like this feature because it gives me peace and quiet. Also, with it I don't have to make dozens, if not hundreds of calls to stop all these companies (and their myriad divisions) from disturbing me. Just my 2 cents, Rick Cox Data Design Consultant Ameritech Team Data ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #4 **************************** From ptownson Fri Jan 29 18:34:12 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA26732 for telecom-recent; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:34:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:34:12 -0500 (EST) From: TELECOM Digest Editor Message-Id: <199901292334.SAA26732@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: telecom-recent Subject: TELECOM Digest V19_#3 > TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 20:18:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 3 > > Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson > > The End of Morse Code? (Danny Burstein) > Book Review: "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu (Rob Slade) > Pac*Bell ADSL Bandwidth Fraud? (Robert L. McMillin) > Book Review: "Just Java", Peter van der Linden (Rob Slade) > Waiting For Windows Refund Day (Monty Solomon) > A Cell of Your Own? Who Needs a Payphone? (Tad Cook) > Why Don't CLID Boxes Do This ... (phs3) > > TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not > exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere > there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of > public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America > On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated > newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. > > Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual > readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: > > * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * > > The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick > Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax > or phone at: > Post Office Box 4621 > Skokie, IL USA 60076 > Phone: 847-727-5427 > Fax: 847-675-3140 > ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** > > Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: > http://telecom-digest.org > > They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: > ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives > (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) > > A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note > to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this > method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom > Archives. > > ************************************************************************* > * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * > * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * > * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * > * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* > * ing views of the ITU. * > ************************************************************************* > > In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert > has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and > enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order > telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has > been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very > inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request > a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 twenty 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. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:11:55 EST > From: Danny Burstein > Subject: The End of Morse Code? (fwd) > > Nice writeup ... > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:48:44 -0800 (PST) > From: Jay D. Dyson > To: Defcon Stuff > Subject: The End of Morse Code? > > -----BEGIN FORWARDED ARTICLE----- > > The Economist, Jan. 23, 1999 > SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY > > ... --- ... .-. .. .--. (SOS, RIP) > > Morse code is being replaced by a new satellite-based system for sending > distress calls at sea. Its dots and dashes have had a good run for their > money > > "Calling all. This is our last cry before our eternal silence." > > Surprisingly this message, which flashed over the airwaves in the dots > and dashes of Morse code on January 31st 1997, was not a desperate > transmission by a radio operator on a sinking ship. Rather, it was a > message signalling the end of the use of Morse code for distress calls > in French waters. Since 1992 countries around the world have been > decommissioning their Morse equipment with similar (if less poetic) > sign-offs, as the world's shipping switches over to a new satellite- > based arrangement, the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System. > The final deadline for the switch-over to GMDSS is February 1st, a > date that is widely seen as the end of an era. > > For although dots and dashes will not die out altogether -- they will, > for example, continue to be used by amateur radio operators, spies, > and some members of the armed forces -- the switch to GMDSS marks the > end of the last significant international use of Morse. The code has, > however, had a good history. From its origins in 1832, when an > American inventor called Samuel Morse first started scribbling in his > notebook, it grew to become the global standard for sending messages > along wires and, later, over the airwaves. Morse code was, in effect, > the network protocol for the world's first Internet: the international > telegraph network, whose cables trussed up the globe in the second > half of the 19th century. > > The mother of all networks: > > Appropriately for a technology commonly associated with radio operators on > sinking ships, the idea of Morse code is said to have occurred to Samuel > Morse while he was on board a ship crossing the Atlantic. At the time > Morse was a painter and occasional inventor, but when another of the > ship's passengers informed him of recent advances in electrical theory, > Morse was suddenly taken with the idea of building an electric telegraph. > > Other inventors had been trying to do just that for the best part of a > century. Morse succeeded and is now remembered as "the father of the > telegraph" partly thanks to his singlemindedness -- it was 12 years, for > example, before he secured money from Congress to build his first > telegraph line -- but also for technical reasons. Compared with rival > electric telegraph designs, such as the needle telegraph developed by > William Cooke and Charles Wheatstone in Britain, Morse's design was very > simple: it required little more than a "key" (essentially, a spring-loaded > switch) to send messages, a clicking "sounder" to receive them, and a wire > to link the two. But although Morse's hardware was simple, there was a > catch: in order to use his equipment, operators had to learn the special > code of dots and dashes that still bears his name. > > Originally, Morse had not intended to use combinations of dots and dashes > to represent individual letters. His first code, sketched in his notebook > during that transatlantic voyage, used dots and dashes to represent the > digits 0 to 9. Morse's idea was that messages would consist of strings of > numbers corresponding to words and phrases in a special numbered > dictionary. But Morse later abandoned this scheme and, with the help of > an associate, Alfred Vail, devised the Morse alphabet, which could be used > to spell out messages a letter at a time in dots and dashes. > > At first, the need to learn this complicated-looking code made Morse's > telegraph seem impossibly tricky compared with other, more user-friendly > designs. Cooke's and Wheatstone's telegraph, for example, used five > needles to pick out letters on a diamond-shaped grid. But although this > meant that anyone could use it, it also required five wires between > telegraph stations. Morse's telegraph needed only one. And some people, > it soon transpired, had a natural facility for Morse code. > > As electric telegraphy took off in the early 1850s, the Morse telegraph > quickly became dominant. It was adopted as the European standard in 1851, > allowing direct connections between the telegraph networks of different > countries. (Britain chose not to participate, sticking with needle > telegraphs for a few more years.) By this time Morse code had been revised > to allow for accents and other foreign characters, resulting in a split > between American and International Morse that continues to this day. On > international submarine cables, left and right swings of a light-beam > reflected from a tiny rotating mirror were used to represent dots and > dashes. > > Meanwhile a distinct telegraphic subculture was emerging, with its own > customs and vocabulary, and a hierarchy based on the speed at which > operators could send and receive Morse code. First-class operators, who > could send and receive at speeds of up to 45 words a minute, handled press > traffic, securing the best-paid jobs in big cities. At the bottom of the > pile were slow, inexperienced rural operators, many of whom worked the > wires as part-timers. As their Morse code improved, however, rural > operators found that their new-found skill was a passport to better pay in > a city job. Telegraphers soon swelled the ranks of the emerging middle > classes. > > Telegraphy was also deemed suitable work for women. By 1870, a third of > the operators in the Western Union office in New York, the largest > telegraph office in America, were female. Just as skilled operators found > that they could recognise each other over the wires from their style of > Morse code, many operators claimed to be able to recognise women > operators. Inevitably, romances were initiated over the wires -- just as > they are today by e-mail. There were even a handful of weddings by > telegraph. > > In a dramatic ceremony in 1871, Morse himself said goodbye to the global > community of telegraphers he had brought into being. After a lavish > banquet and many adulatory speeches, Morse sat down behind an operator's > table and, placing his finger on a key connected to every telegraph wire > in America, tapped out his final farewell to a standing ovation. By the > time of his death in 1872, the world was well and truly wired: more than > 650,000 miles of telegraph line and 30,000 miles of submarine cable were > throbbing with Morse code; and 20,000 towns and villages were connected to > the global network. Just as the Internet is today often called an > "information superhighway", the telegraph was described in its day as an > "instantaneous highway of thought". > > But by the 1890s the Morse telegraph's heyday as a cutting-edge technology > was coming to an end, with the invention of the telephone and the rise of > automatic telegraphs, precursors of the teleprinter, neither of which > required specialist skills to operate. Morse code, however, was about to > be given a new lease of life thanks to another new technology: wireless. > > Following the invention of radiotelegraphy by Guglielmo Marconi in 1896, > its potential for use at sea quickly became apparent. For the first time, > ships could communicate with each other, and with the shore, whatever the > weather and even when out of visual range. In 1897 Marconi successfully > sent Morse code messages between a shore station and an Italian warship > 19km (12 miles) away. The first sea rescue after a distress call sent by > radiotelegraph took place in 1899, when a lightship in the Dover Straits > reported the grounding of Elbe, a steamship. Two years later, Marconi > sent the first transatlantic radio signal: three dots, the letter "S" in > Morse code. By 1910, Morse radio equipment was commonplace on ships. > > The sinking of the Titanic in 1912, however, highlighted the need for > radio operators to listen at all times for distress signals. After the > disaster it emerged that the liner Californian had been only a few miles > away, and that hundreds of lives might have been saved had the > Californian's radio operator been on duty and so able to receive the > Titanic's "SOS" distress call. At the first International Convention for > Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), held in London in 1914, it was agreed that > large vessels should maintain 24-hour radio watch. > > This rule has remained ever since, with subsequent SOLAS conventions > gradually introducing new rules to keep pace with the development of > technologies such as radiotelephony. The advent of satellite technology > led the International Maritime Organisation to amend the SOLAS convention > in 1988 to introduce GMDSS, an automated emergency communications system > based on satellite and radio links. > > Optional since 1992, GMDSS equipment will be compulsory worldwide from > February 1st on all ships that exceed 300 tonnes, carry 12 or more > passengers, or travel in international waters. (Owners of smaller vessels > can install the equipment if they wish.) Under GMDSS, anyone on board a > ship in distress merely has to press a button to send a distress call > containing the vessel's identification number and its precise location -- > there is no need for a skilled Morse operator. And so, after nearly 170 > years, Morse code will finally slip beneath the waves. > > Over and out: > > As communications protocols go, Morse has lasted a surprisingly long time > - -- admittedly with a few tweaks here and there. So how might its modern > descendant, the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), fare in comparison? TCP/IP > was devised in 1973 by Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf (a man with Morse-like > stature in the Internet world who is often known as the "father of the > Internet"). > > As with Morse code before it, TCP/IP is being improved to respond to new > challenges and technologies. Its addressing system is now being > overhauled to make room for billions of additional connections, to allow > for the wireless devices expected to proliferate over coming years and to > enable even household appliances to go online. Mr Cerf is also working on > how to extend the Internet to such other places as the moon and Mars, > since the time delays as radio signals travel through space make the > current protocol unsuitable. > > Further improvements will follow: indeed, since it is spoken by computers, > not humans, TCP/IP is easier to adapt than was Morse. Even so, in today's > fast-changing computer world, it seems unlikely that TCP/IP will remain in > continuous use for anything like as long as the century and a half managed > by Morse code, its distant digital ancestor. > > - ----- END FORWARDED ARTICLE ----- > > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My sincere thanks to Danny for sending > along this really great bit of history for the Digest. PAT] > > ------------------------------ > > From: Rob Slade > Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:43:27 -0800 > Subject: Book Review: "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu > Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca > > BKDNSBND.RVW 981115 > > "DNS and BIND", Paul Albitz/Cricket Liu, 1998, 1-56592-512-2, > U$32.95/C$46.95 > %A Paul Albitz > %A Cricket Liu > %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 > %D 1998 > %G 1-56592-512-2 > %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. > %O U$32.95/C$46.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com > %P 520 p. > %T "DNS and BIND", 3rd ed. > > Of the millions of users on the Internet, almost all are blissfully > unaware of the complexity and magnitude of the task of network > routing. How does the network know where to deliver a piece of email? > In fact, given the packet nature of all Internet traffic, how do > telnet or ftp packets get, reliably and generally quickly, to their > destination? Few even recognize the term DNS, the Domain Name > Service, which handles the problem. Administrators may have used > BIND, the Berkeley Internet Name Domain program, to manage DNS, but > may not fully understand the importance, use or finer aspects of it. > This book gives both background and operational details. > > Topics covered include background of the system, an explanation of the > workings of DNS, how to get BIND and a domain name, setting up BIND, > DNS and email, configuring hosts, maintaining BIND, modifying domains, > creation of subdomains, advanced features and security, nslookup, BIND > debugging messages, troubleshooting, the Resolver and Name Server > Library routines, as well as miscellaneous other information. > > Given the nature of the network routing problem, a full understanding > of DNS likely requires actual hands-on work. Albitz and Liu have, > however, put together clear, straightforward, and sometimes even > lighthearted text to make the learning process as painless as > possible. The book also covers more advanced topics than > straightforward routing administration. Bind 8.1.2 is the basic > version for the book, but it also looks back to Bind 4.8.3 and 4.9.x > because of the number of shipping products that may still be based on > those. > > copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995, 1997, 1998 BKDNSBND.RVW 981115 > > rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com > Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm > Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm > Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ > Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 06:53:10 -0800 > From: Robert L. McMillin > Organization: Syseca, Inc. > Subject: Pac*Bell ADSL Bandwidth Fraud? > > Pac*Bell's ADSL offerings have been so far really exciting: quite > inexpensive, and widely deployed (for an initial rollout). However, I > just heard something from an ISP friend of mine that is making me > really jittery about buying: according to him, Pac*Bell is > concentrating their ADSL lines back at DS3 junctions, and rather > heavily overloading these. This, obviously, is a bid to keep the > price of ADSL down. However, some users are reporting speeds as low as > 10 kb/s during peak usage times because of this. That is, you'd be > better off using a conventional dial-up ISP with any flavor of analog > modem. > > Has anyone else heard of this story? > > Robert L. McMillin | Not the voice of Syseca, Inc. | rlm@syseca-us.com > Personal: rlm@helen.surfcty.com | rlm@netcom.com > > ------------------------------ > > From: Rob Slade > Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User > Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:07:45 -0800 > Subject: Book Review: "Just Java", Peter van der Linden > Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca > > BKJSJAVA.RVW 990108 > > "Just Java", Peter van der Linden, 1999, 0-13-010534-1, > U$44.99/C$63.00 > %A Peter van der Linden pvdl@best.com > %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 > %D 1998 > %G 0-13-010534-1 > %I Prentice Hall > %O U$44.99/C$63.00 201-236-7139 fax: 201-236-7131 > %P 776 p. + CD-ROM > %S SunSoft Press Java Series > %T "Just Java 1.2, fourth edition" > > Huh. Back to the original, and somewhat inaccurate, title. This book > is a fairly clear introduction to Java. The material is accessible to > the non-programmer, albeit with some dedication. The content is fast > paced, so you may need to go over some sections several times. But it > isn't *just* Java. Oh, no. The jokes start on the *dedication* page. > I am saddened by the loss of the "World's Best" Rolls-Royce, the > waterbomb-carrying paper airplane, and the amusing but painfully > realistic look at getting connected to the Internet, but the table of > easily misunderstood error messages and things learned on the Internet > are still there. I guess as the book grows, something has to give. > > Chapter one looks at the what and why of Java. Chapter two goes a > long way, although perhaps not all the way, to explaining object- > oriented programming. (Chapter six adds to it.) This section is > perhaps best appreciated by C programmers, although it does a fair > amount of demystifying of object terminology. The structure of the > book has been reorganized, making it less sectional. The chapters > form a more standard, sequential tutorial on Java, covering the > basics, keywords, types, names, arrays, operators. classes, > statements, interfaces, packages, threads, applets, security, > libraries, GUI, containers, the AWT (Abstract Window Toolkit), > graphics, file I/O, and networking. > > But I must also talk about the CD-ROM. Generally I don't, since many > authors simply throw on a few megs of shareware or RFCs, which may or > may not have a bearing on the topic of the book. Not our Peter. > First off, there is over 500 megabytes on the CD, filling it almost > completely. The Java 1.2 JDK (Java Development Kit) wasn't ready in > time for the book, but it has the older versions for WinNT/9x, Mac, > Solaris, Linux, and so forth. (Don't have Linux? It's got that too.) > Or, if you'd rather program in Perl, ada, Fortran, C, or Eiffel, it > can help you too. Plus FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions lists), > sample code, games, the paper airplane (animated), Sherlock Holmes > stories, the Magna Carta, the Jargon File, and a new and different > Rolls story. The directory structure may not be immediately obvious > to all, but then, that's what grep is for. Also, the link to the book > (the CD is navigable via browser) off the main page doesn't seem to > work, but that's what the "Go" box is for. > > So, while it may or may not be the world's best tutorial on Java, it > is definitely the most enjoyable. > > copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 - 1999 BKJSJAVA.RVW 990108 > > rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com > Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm > Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm > Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ > Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 13:39:13 -0500 > From: Monty Solomon > Subject: Waiting for Windows Refund Day > > http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17442.html > > Waiting for Windows Refund Day > by Chris Oakes > 2:10 p.m. 20.Jan.99.PST > > If you don't use Windows, why should you pay for it? > > That's the logic driving a group of Linux users who want to make good > on a tiny clause built into the Windows end-user license. The clause > offers a refund to PC owners who buy a computer preloaded with Windows > 98, but don't use the operating system. > > If it gathers steam, their effort could lead to legal action requiring > Microsoft and PC vendors to make it easier to opt out of using the > Windows OS on their PCs. > > "I'm hoping in the long run we'll be able to pressure Microsoft to > change their OEM contracts," said Matt Jensen a participant in the > effort and webmaster for the Windows Refund Center. The site will > coordinate and track efforts to obtain refunds from users' respective PC > manufacturers. > > The movement ramped up Tuesday, and the grassroots group has set aside > 15 February as Windows Refund Day when those seeking to uninstall > Windows from their PCs will send out their letters. > > Jensen and others are contributing ideas to the Refund Center following > the news of an Australian PC owner's effort to obtain a refund for his > copy of Windows. Discussion of Geoffrey Bennett's saga began on Slashdot > , a site popular with users of the alternative PC operating system > Linux. > > Attorney Erwin Shustak, chief litigator of securities and corporate > finance at the law firm Shustak, Jalil, & Heller, said Bennett's effort > may not lead to immediate, dramatic consequences, but could give rise to > an eventual class-action lawsuit. > > Microsoft and PC makers "had a contract that clearly said what [users] > were entitled to do, and yet they didn't honor the contract," Shustak > said of Bennett's story. "They made it extremely difficult for him to > obtain what he was supposed to obtain. I believe it was an illusory > clause; they had no procedure sent up to honor it." > > The Microsoft Windows End-User License Agreement, or EULA, that > accompanies the IBM ThinkPad reads, "If you do not agree to the terms of > this EULA, PC manufacturer and Microsoft are unwilling to license the > software product to you. In such an event ... you should promptly > contact PC manufacturer for instructions on a return of the unused > product(s) for a refund." > > Microsoft could not immediately be reached for comment. > > Full story to follow. > > Copyright ) 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: A Cell of Your Own? Who Needs a Pay Phone? > Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 00:00:18 PST > From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) > > SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) -- Some of the toughest new restrictions in > California could be sounding last call for pay phones in neighborhoods > where people need them most. > > This Orange County city this month joined a growing number of towns > enacting ordinances threatening removal of thousands of streetside > phones: nuisances to some people who have phones of their own; > lifelines to people who can't afford one. > > "I wish they were all yanked out," said Debbie McEwen, who complains > that the phone booth near her Santa Ana home is plagued by graffiti, > cigarette butts and loiterers. "They're magnets. People hang out all > day and all night." > > As cellular telephones become standard equipment for those who can > afford them, pay phones continue to proliferate thanks to federal > deregulation. > > But Santa Ana and other communities are beginning to see them as > eyesores. Critics complain many newer pay phones are poorly > maintained, and many people are put off by the ads they display. > > Santa Ana's measure has angered pay phone owners who say they will be > forced to remove most of the city's 1,500 outdoor phones. Officials > say the phones have spread so rapidly it's uncertain how many have > been installed; many new ones lack the required permits. > > Statewide, the number of pay phones has increased by nearly 65,000 to > about 265,000 since 1990, according to Public Utilities Commission > figures. Practically all the new phones were installed by independent > companies. > > Santa Ana's ordinance does not target specific phones for removal. It > establishes strict rules the owners say will make it too costly to > change and operate the phones. > > The ordinance limits the amount of exposed conduit connecting phone > lines to booths and bans the use of exposed wires connecting a pay > phone to overhead lines. > > Of the 300 phones Pacific Bell has in the city, about 210 would not > comply with the new ordinance, Pacific Bell executive Tom Weber said. > > "It's not just my pay phones in Santa Ana I'm worried about. It's my > 930 phones I have in Southern California," said owner Ken Scott, > president of San Diego Pay Phone Owners Association. "If this takes > off in other cities, it's going to be a mess out there, and it's a > mess that doesn't need to happen." > > The owners have vowed to fight the proposed law, saying it punishes the > entire industry for the sins of a few irresponsible operators. > > But reducing pay phones seems to be the trend across the country, the > {Los Angeles Times} reported Monday. Some older ordinances were aimed at > drug dealing and prostitution, but communities are increasingly > focusing on aesthetics. > > -- In California, Huntington Park bans pay phones on private property > in its business district, a law that is being challenged by the > telephone industry; > > -- Preservationists in New York are fighting plans to add nearly > 20,000 public phones across the city, fearful the booths will block > views of historic landmarks; > > -- In downtown Perth Amboy, N.J., booths are prohibited within 600 > feet of each other; > > -- Chicago officials have removed thousands of pay phones outside > stores. > > Besides complaints from phone owners that Santa Ana's landmark law > infringes on their rights, the prospect of removing booths has also > sparked safety concerns. > > Community activists point out that one-third of all 911 calls in Santa > Ana come from pay phones. > > Jack Elwir, owner of H&H Liquor Store on Civic Center Drive, said the > three phones outside his businesses are used regularly by people > making calls to family in Mexico. > > "A lot of customers don't have phones -- or even cars," he said. > > Until recently, Claudia Vasquez said the phone outside her home was > her main link to friends and family because she didn't have the > identification to get her own. She recently got the problem > straightened out and had a line installed. > > "They can't remove the phones," Vasquez said. "People use them all the > time." > > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The two COCOTS of mine which readers > will recall me discussing about a year ago when I had them put in for > the benefit of the bus riders and had them programmed for extremely > low and fair rates wound up getting vandalized so much that I was > going to have them removed entirely, however the company which services > them for me suggested a few improvements, including the latest vandal- > proof technology. They put in two new phones which appear to be almost > impossible to vandalize. They have some sort of heavy metal across the > front, and a thing at the top where coins go in that prevent 'stuffing' > the coin slot with string and other things designed to capture the > coins people insert. When I started getting at least one complaint > each day about the old phones, I called and asked them to find some > solution. The new phones sort of look like the type of phone installed > for prisoner use in jails, etc. Let's see these get vandalized! PAT] > > ------------------------------ > > From: p.h.s.3@watvm.uwaterloo.ca (phs3) > Subject: Why Don't CLID Boxes do This ... > Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 03:56:16 GMT > Organization: Remove dots from userid portion to reply > > .. or do they? > > Since we got CLID, we find that we use it a lot as a telephone > directory for numbers of folks for which we have a short-term need. > For example, my daughter is off to a friend's house for the afternoon; > in negotiating the visit, her parents have probably called our house, > so their number is on the box. Far easier to scroll back to find it > than to look it up. After the visit, we don't need the number for > days/weeks/months/ever again, so we don't care. > > Now, that works fine. What happens, though, is that we wind up > spending a certain amount of time "maintaining" the box -- deleting > OUT OF AREA, PRIVATE CALL, and 'boring' numbers such as my office # > when I call home (which appears as the office switchboard number, thus > not even being useful if my wife didn't know my number by heart). If > we don't do this, then numbers which we *do* want kept -- my > sister-in-law's second line, neighbor's cell number, etc., scroll off > and are lost. > > So...we would love a CLID box which allowed: > > - defining numbers as "nuisance" numbers, to be kept until reviewed, > then deleted either immediately, the next time a call comes in, or > just first when the box fills up; > > - the ability to "lock" numbers, much as my pager allows, so they > won't scroll off; > > - a "delete duplicates", so the 15 calls back & forth about the visit to the > friend's house don't waste space in the box. > > Anyone heard of such a beast? Or are CLID boxes such a commodity that > features aren't worth the trouble? Yeah, we could do this with a PC, > but we're not likely to put one at each phone ... > > Cheers, > > ..phsiii > > ------------------------------ > > End of TELECOM Digest V19 #3 > **************************** From mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu Mon Feb 1 15:52:38 1999 Received: from spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu (spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu [129.81.224.11]) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA25178 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 15:52:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (mcuccia@localhost) by spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu (8.8.5/8.8.4) with SMTP id OAA43098 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:52:14 -0600 X-Authentication-Warning: spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu: mcuccia owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:52:14 -0600 (CST) From: Mark J Cuccia X-Sender: mcuccia@spnode03.tcs.tulane.edu Reply-To: Mark J Cuccia To: telecom-recent@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V19_#2 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII TELECOM Digest Wed, 27 Jan 99 19:16:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 2 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN (Ronda Hauben) Re: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN (Ronda Hauben) Video Over ISDN (Joachim Weber) Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Michael A. Covington) 1+ Long Distance (Keith Michaels) Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts (Tad Cook) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN Date: 26 Jan 1999 23:50:15 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Following is a report by Gordon Cook sent to the IFWP list which is helpful in understanding some of what has been happening with the behind the scenes maneuvers of the U.S. government to transfer Internet assets from the public to the private sector. My comments on this will follow in the next message. From: Gordon Cook Subject: [ifwp] what ICANN is up to: the financial arrangements for paying IANA salaries; why the NIST solicitation for ICANN contracts is illegal and can be stopped with an ORSC protest letter; why its a waste of board member's time to talk to mail lists; conversations with esther dyson and mike roberts and others For the past 48 hours I have done nothing but research and write the following. Keeping IANA Paychecks Coming The process last summer of setting up newco (IANA) essentially ran out of time. Details like the coming October 1 unemployment of the IANA staff, including Jon Postel, went into the month of September unsettled. They did so presumably because the parties putting things together assumed that Magaziner would have no choice but to bless ICANN on October 1 and hand over keys to the kingdom to them as well as money for them to start doing their work. When it became clear that this likely would not happen, something had to be done about the paychecks of IANA employees. Mike Roberts on behalf of ICANN made a deal with USC and ISI whereby they (ISI) would enter a transition agreement with ICANN so that ICANN would pay the salaries of the IANA employees (six people) effective October 1. (Where ICANN gets the money is anyone's guess - likely from GIP - ie IBM.) Thus Mike Roberts found himself in a situation where he had to scurry at the end of September to file ICANN's incorporation papers so that as of October 1st ICANN would exist as a legal entity and be able to sign an agreement with ISI whereby the IANA employees remained legally ISI/USC employees with full benefits (health care etc). This was conditional on ICANN sending ISI a monthly check to cover the cost of their benefits through Dec 31, 1998. IANA expenses for office support, network connectivity etc would be paid from the DARPA Teranode network contract with ISI through 12/31/98. When they realized that 12/31/98 would come and go without a legally constituted and functional ICANN to take responsibility for the IANA employees, the December 24 agreement mentioned in the NIST solicitation in the January 6 Commerce Business Daily was struck to handle both functions. It supposedly is nothing more than a continuation of the agreements that were reached last summer with ICANN to continue to pay salaries and Terranode to cover network and other expenses. Solicitation Number 52SBNT9C1020 from NIST is to formalize these informal agreements by giving ICANN a NIST contract by which they will be responsible for paying for the IANA functions. ON Going Mechanics such as NIST Contract Versus NTIA MOU of 11/25/98 The on going needs which, like it or not, ICANN is now legally constituted to fill create a situation where it becomes very difficult for Becky Burr on the one hand and Elliot Maxwell to hold ICANN's feet to the fire on the issues of its unaccountable bylaws and openness. The reason why is that ICANN knows that IANA salaries must be paid and that other parts of the Magaziner constructed house of cards like the requirement for NSI to develop a shared database by April 1, 1999 with specs subject to review by an ICANN (NewCo) appointed review panel. (If memory serves me correctly Becky gave ICANN permission to appoint such a panel of experts.) The problem is that with each step of the way and each action or approval granted ICANN purely for administrative reasons, NTIA is in effect tacitly recognizing and transferring authority to IANA. The intent of the 11/25/98 MOU may have been good, but the fact of the matter however is that it looks like IANA can erode the good intent by simply out waiting NTIA. I suspect that legal action will be required to VOID the sole source solicitation or to sue the US Gov't and the ICANN board before we will see any change in ICANN's behavior. Given the direction of events ICANN will either open up its operations to public scrutiny or it will find itself in court. IOdesign is likely to sue again and given the course of events, we'd welcome that. To be meaningful the NTIA needs to revisit the ICANN MoU and spell out milestones and due dates for deliverables. If Becky and Elliot do not do this we may begin to wonder whether they mean for the MOU to be taken seriously. Lack of Trust, Suspicion and Paranoia Reaching new Highs I have seen a credible assertion that claims IANA staff are being restricted in technical communications they can have with with NSI. I have reached the appropriate people at NSI who have assured me that as far as they can tell all necessary channels of technical communication are fully open with IANA and with everyone else for that matter. I also reached Mike Roberts on his cell phone. Mike, in the middle of a business meeting, graciously took a very few minutes to hear my concerns. Mike said that he could unequivocally assure me that neither he, nor Esther, nor the ICANN board, nor any ICANN lawyers had placed any restrictions on the IANA staff. He added that he believed that it was only rumor and said that if there were any shred of truth to it would be Ron Ohlander, the ISI administrator who would know. (Legally ISI still is the employer of the IANA staff, so if any orders were given Ohlander would be in a posityion to know. I have a call into him but suspect that he will be unreachable before tomorrow.) On balance, I suspect - given that I have reached directly or indirectly virtually everyone involved - that the rumor was likely based on a misunderstanding and has no real substance. The probing however proved to be a useful exercise, because time and time again I was told that the amount of fear, distrust, and paranoia on the part of all was running extremely high. I conclude that two things are at fault. One ICANN's continued insistence on closed board meetings and secrecy, and two that the actions of the MIGHTY Five taken with Sims Cochetti and Magaziner to form ICANN last summer were deeply flawed ICANN Policy as a Destroyer of Trust I have documented elsewhere the widespread disgust with the ICANN Policy of closed board meetings Dave Farber - however well intentioned he may have been is one of the creators of this mess. On Monday, perhaps like the Sorcerer's apprentice horrified by what had transpired Dave stuck his neck out on the IFWP list and said: It is time to raise the issue yet again of the distressing fact that the Board meetings of ICANN are closed. Many moons ago several of us strongly suggested that it would be appropriate for the ICANN Board to operate under the same set of rules that US Federal Advisory Boards operate under as well as NotForProfit Boards like EFF and ISOC. Namely all meetings are open to the public to attend and listen. Often observers do not have the right to talk except for a set aside period during the meeting when 5 minute positions can be requested. The Board has the right to convene in Executive Session but in all cases the subjects that can be discussed at exec session are limited, sometimes by law and more often by good faith and the fear of law. I strongly suggest that this be the principle that ICANN adopt rapidly. Why am I bringing this up. I was told that the ICANN Board meeting in Singapore is closed and that there will be a open "meeting" the day before. That is not the same thing. Open meetings are a good way to gather opinions and an OPEN BOARD meeting is a necessary way to insure openness and the respect of the community WHICH THE ICANN BOARD MUST SERVE. (caps intentional). If there is a reason why this is not appropriate for ICANN but is for the others , I think the ICANN Board owes it to the community to tell us now those reasons in detail.[End quote of Farber message.] Esther Dyson chose to answer not Farber but Jeff Williams saying: Yes. It is in our bylaws and in all the public statements we have made. Basically, we could have had "open" board meetings with executive sessions that were closed, but we figured (the Initial Board voted) that this (below) is the best way to do it. Dave Farber to his great cerdit came back and wrote to the IFWP list: "Esther, There is no real problem scheduling an Exec Session for a Board meeting. The PITAC and all other federal Advisory Boards do that ALL the time. An open NON-Board meeting is not an OPEN BOARD Meeting. The public has a right to see how the issues are handled etc in such an organization and the best way to ensure that is to have OPEN Board meetings. Sorry, Dave" Farber made a third comment about how the logistics of such could be handled. Esther answered *NONE* of Farber's three comments. Unfortunately no list members spoke up on Farber's behalf. This morning however Esther Dyson did call me from the airport. We had an extremely useful 10 minute conversation before she had to run for her plane. She did not say it was off record. At the end I asked if there was anything off record, adding that I felt what she said needed to be accurate and wanted to try to ensure that. "Well why not send it to me before you put it out?" I hesitantly said yes and asked what kind of turn around I would get. 36 hours (she would be on net when she got the chance) was the reply as she dashed off. This leaves me with an unpleasant problem. I am going ahead with my notes on the call. I believe I can be quite accurate. If I am not I invite Esther to send me corrections of or do the correcting herself. Time here is important and her information, while not a huge surprise, is very helpful in understanding the dynamics of what is happening. Now for the details of the conversation: Dyson: I understand and am sympathetic to Dave Farber's call for open Board meetings. But you have got to understand that half our board is not American and they think the US federal open meetings law is something they should not have to subject themselves to. These are business people who don't have their board meetings in public. When they were invited to be on the ICANN board, they could read in the ICANN by laws that ICANN board meetings would be closed. This was something they felt comfortable with. COOK: But if you are saying that after Farber's posting you polled the board again and the board is STILL voting to keep board meetings closed, then some of the American members must also be voting despite the flack you are getting to keep the meetings closed? Dyson: Yes. Now when we get members, if the members vote for open board meetings, we will have to have open board meetings. So stick with us a while and the board meetings will eventually become open. You must understand: These are business people. Corporate boards don't have public board meetings. Cook: But this *IS* the internet for heaven sakes ....internet business is done in the open. Dyson: That's what the mail lists claim. But the mail lists are a self selected minority of the people that we must serve. Those not on the mail lists are quite happy with what we are doing. [Cook: I believe this to be almost a verbatim quote of Esther's words.] I have a thick skin so I am willing to subject myself to abuse. But why should the board members be forced to waste their time listening to and dealing with the wild accusations that abound on these lists? Cook: Agreed that it can get quite abusive, but the abuse comes with the territory. What if IFWP were run on a server where civil discourse rules apply and are ENFORCED! Dyson: Sounds attractive. Cook: I am very hopeful that this will happen. Please join us there. Talk to us. With substance. With fair answers to questions designed to establish some common values and build some trust. Dyson: perhaps. Let me consider it. Cook: please do. Let me just say that the board suffers from the same disease that NSI management did in assuming that Internet mail lists are an irritant.....something that doesn't matter. I was told that twice last year by Don Telage as I tried to explain that NSI's refusal to allow any NSI employee had help to cement hatred of NSI on the network. Perhaps the show down with Becky last September, gave NSI second thoughts because NSI has changed its policy. Sounds like the board is going to have to learn the same lesson that NSI learned. Dyson: I hear what you are saying but unfortunately there's not time to respond....gotta run, bye. Jock Gill (holder of the first major internet policy position in the clinton administyration) wrote me privately a day ago and captured the essense of what Esther was saying. (Used with Jock's permission). The issue, I think, is that the good folks you (Gordon) inquired about come from, for the most part, old industrial/educational hierarchies which are famous for being autocratic, top down, feudal fiefdoms with all the management style that implies. As well as no requirements to run open meeting in a democratic way -- they do not come from the world of elected public servants who assume such rules. Thus why would we expect them to act in any way other than what they have been successful at? New tricks for old dogs? Not too likely. Let's not ask for miracles. Who on the board in question really understands the concept of stupid networks and smart edges and the new management paradigm it is enabling? Who on the board understands management by dialogue, not monologue? What Then is the Solution? Although I haven't asked Dave Farber directly, I suspect and certainly *HOPE* that he is horrified by what he and the remainder of the Mighty Five have done. Lets assume Esther gave a fair rendition of what the reasons are for ICANN's silence in front of the rest of the Internet. Farber, Cerf, Roberts, Landweber and Bradner are smart enough to know that in working with Sims and Cochetti and Magaziner in the summer and in agreeing to create a board of business people who knew nothing about the internet they were creating a potential monster - certainly that they were creating an entity that in being haughty and closed to the open discussion culture of the net would be asking for recrimination and conflict. Because they acted as a cabal to provide adult supervision to the Internet, they may well now have created an entity that will be still born because it simply cannot get enough trust from anyone involved to do its job. Dave Farber is to be commended for speaking out on Monday. But with no one crawling out on the limb behind him he has fallen silent. I hope he spoke out because he is looking at what he helped to create and is horrified by what he sees. It seems that the best way for Dave to show that he was serious is to keep up the pressure.. IF THE MIGHTY FIVE JUST MADE AN HONEST MISTAKE LAST SEPTEMBER NOW IS THE TIME FOR THEM TO SHOW THAT SUCH IS THE CASE. The NIST Solicitation on Behalf of NTIA Meanwhile we must ask what Becky Burr is doing with NTIA solicitation on behalf of ICANN? I spoke late Tuesday afternoon to Teresa Reefe, contracts specialist at NIST. COOK: Why to NIST? Why not NTIA? Reefe: because while NTIA has a grants and cooperative agreements office, it does not have a contracts office and this is a contract with ICANN. COOK: who decided it would be a contract and on what grounds? Reefe: I'd like to know that myself. it was our lawyers downtown. they just delivered intrustions out here. When NTIA does a contract they have to use our office (Nist) COOK: Does the FAR apply? Reefe: yes COOK: the CBD said Nist intends to award a sole source contract to ICANN for operation of the Internet Assigned Numbers authority. What is meant by "operation"....?? How is the IANA defined? Are we talking about paying the salries of Joyce reynolds bill manning and others? Reefe: don't know.... that will be part of the solicitation being prepared. Cook: Ahh....solici ------------------------------ From: Ronda Hauben Subject: Re: Cook on U.S. Government Giving IANA Contract to ICANN Date: 26 Jan 1999 23:51:28 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC Thanks to Gordon Cook for his recent report on what is happening with the NIST annoucement for giving the IANA contract to ICANN. However, I want to add some aspects that Gordon left out in this situation. The problem to me is *not* that the NTIA or NIST is sole sourcing this contract. The problem is 1) That it is holding IANA hostage to an illegitimate and secretly contrived plan to give away very lucrative assets to a private sector entity. These assets will give great power over the Internet and all who use it to those who grab control over this entity. 2) That IANA is too important a part of the Internet to be held hostage in this way. It isn't that some other private sector business entity should get control of IANA through competitive contract solicitations, but rather that a U.S. government entity that is appropriate, like DARPA, should continue to administer the contract with IANA and pay the salaries of those who work for IANA while there be a genuine discussion and examination of how to create a protected environment for IANA to function that includes the public interest being dominant, not commercial objectives. 3) That the U.S. public and folks all over the world have contributed to the funding of the Internet and of its development and achievements. These folks should not be disenfranchised by this power play of the U.S. government holding the paychecks of IANA folks hostage to their trying to pass enormously valuable and power giving assets to some private entities. 4) I didn't notice the U.S. government having any problem paying for the big bills that it has taken to build the Internet (for the U.S. share of the bills), and the public interest needs to be protected now and the Internet needs a way to scale and to continue to serve as a unique new medium of worldwide communication. Therefore the U.S. government should stop hassling the IANA folks and should make sure that their pay checks are paid by the U.S. government. 5) For a long range solution, the administrative fees for IP numbers shouldn't be going for profits for various entities, but if needed could pay the what are minimal costs for IANA folks salaries. 6) The fruit of a poison tree is poison. The longer this power play by the U.S. govenrment goes on, the worse the situation will get. There is the need for an investigation into how this all happened and a plan for making the needed changes so that the public interest is dominant in what is happening, not someone's idea of how to convert the Internet into a plaything for marketeers. 7) When Ira Magaziner called me this summer he said there were 2 problems the U.S. government was trying to solve. a) the problem with trademarks and domain names b) the problem of international pressure for participation in what happens with the Internet. (I don't have my notes now from talking with him, but I will try to find them to see more specifically what he said.) However, subsequent to talking with him, I have seen the minutes from the Federal Network Advisory Committee meeting in 1996 where the U.S. government talked about the need to protect American commercial interests with regard to the Internet and began a process of encouraging the Internet Society and it seems others like the European Union, WIPO etc to figure out how to take over IANA. Though there are minutes of this meeting, there is no real indication of the discussion that went on to make this decision. Nor is there any indication that there was any concern for or interest by any of those present in what the public interest is in regard to the present and future of the Internet and how this would be represented in plans for giving away public assets and control over IANA to some private sector corporation. This meeting in 1996 is exactly the kind of situation that computer pioneers like Norbert Wiener and others like C.P. Snow warned against happening at the 1961 conference they held on Scientists and Decision Making at MIT. They described how there would be government decisions that had to be made regarding the future of the computer and it was very important that these decisions *not* be made by a few people in secret, but that they be the subject of broad discussion and debate. They pointed out that when such important decisions were made by a few people they would more likely be bad decisions, while the broader discussion by large numbers of people made it more likely that such decisions would be good decisions. The decision to transfer IANA and other key and controlling functions of the Internet and the assets involved with these functions to a private sector entity is a bad decision. These are functions that need to be carried out in service of the public and they require public protection of the assets and the power so that it can be used for the cooperative purposes, not for some private purpose. The Internet is too important to be playing such power games with. It is good that Jim Fleming uncovered what is happening with the NIST giving ICANN a control to run IANA. But how to get the problem of what is happening out to as many people as possible is what seems to be needed and it would be good to have whatever help the press or people in the U.S. or around the world, or online or off line can give, as possible. In his talk at the MIT conference, C.P. Snow proposed the importance of as many people as possible knowing what was going on and being involved in the discussion of what should happen. This is what is needed now, and any help making that happen would seem to be of value. Thus what Cook describes is a power play using IANA and the Internet and its users as pawns. The 1961 meeting at MIT that predicted just such actions would happen and discussed how to deal with them is descrived in: Chapter 6 of Netizens "Cybernetics, Time-sharing, Human-computer Symbiosis and Online Communities" The chapter is online at http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook Ronda ronda@panix.com. ------------------------------ From: Joachim Weber Subject: Video Over ISDN Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 22:36:09 +0000 Organization: Aachen University of Technology / Rechnerbetrieb Informatik Hello, Is there anybody who can give some hints to me about how to transmit video (avi) via ISDN using a protocol named H.320 (H.221). I am using MS Visual C++ V6 and MS Direct Draws (6.0) Multimedia Facilities to display videos in windows applications. As this works rather good, my next task is to transmit audio and video data over ISDN. I am wondering wether there is a SDK or a driver which can help me in fulfilling the indicated task. Please note that this has nothing to do with internet. It is just about connecting a computer with an isdn card to a phone capable of receiving audio and video data in H.221 Hope someone knows something useful. Please let me know. Best Regards, Joachim Weber ------------------------------ From: Michael A. Covington Subject: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:31:21 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. Just now I got a call from one, an outfit called VPT that sells pagers. The only identifying information given was the 800 number, 1-800-388-2161, repeated many times. The Caller ID said only "out of area." Am I right that they're breaking some regulation? Is anyone here acquainted with them? Michael A. Covington / AI Center / The University of Georgia http://www.ai.uga.edu/~mc http://www.mindspring.com/~covington <>< ------------------------------ From: keith.r.michaels@boeing.com (Keith Michaels) Subject: 1+ Long Distance Organization: The Boeing Company Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 18:51:26 GMT Why do I have to choose a 1+ long distance carrier? Why can't I just use 1010+ numbers exclusively and forget about paying AT&T or MCI their minimum monthly. As far as I'm concerned, 1+ dialing offers NO advantage. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, you don't have to pick a 1+ carrier. Most telcos will let you default your long distance calls to carrier 'none'. Then dialing 1+ anything except 800/888/877 gets you a recorded message that your call cannot be completed as dialed. Ditto attempts to call '00', the long distance operator. But you do wind up dialing more digits, and asd Tad Cook points out in the next message a smart consumer can get much better deals. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 20:42:39 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) Surprising Number of Consumers Ignore Long-Distance Discounts By Jennifer Files, The Dallas Morning News Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Jan. 26--Deborah Perl said no to every discount long-distance offer that came her way. The telemarketing tactics bothered her so much, she hardly thought about the deals she passed up. Like about half of U.S. customers, Ms. Perl, a pharmaceutical saleswoman in Dallas, stuck with her phone company's "basic" rates. While she frequently saw ads for dime-a-minute long-distance, her calls with AT&T cost up to 30 cents a minute. "As opposed to wanting to be the most educated consumer I could be, I was more concerned that the phone companies were bothering me," she said after checking last month's phone bill. Minutes later, she called AT&T. "I said, `OK, I just looked at my phone bill. I'm an idiot. We have to do something about this."' AT&T suggested a calling plan that Ms. Perl expects will cut her monthly long-distance bills by about $30. A surprising number of people pay too much for long-distance, simply because they never asked for a better deal. Only 36 percent of Americans subscribe to a discount program, according to a recent survey by Yankee Group, a technology consulting firm. "They're everybody. They're in every socioeconomic group," Yankee analyst Fred Voit said of the customers who don't use discount plans. "It's not just people who don't make long-distance phone calls. We have people who make long-distance phone calls who spend a lot of money." Basic-rate customers span all age groups and income levels. Among people who are drawn to technology, 45 percent of those surveyed said they use calling plans, compared with 31 percent of people who don't buy high-tech products until they become commonplace. Yankee says some people probably subscribe to discount plans but don't remember signing up for them. MCI WorldCom and other companies say relatively few of their subscribers pay their highest rates, because most customers choose them to get a break on their rates. AT&T, however, says 60 percent of its customers pay basic rates. "People get so confortable with what they've always done, they don't see any reason for change, and meanwhile they're paying more than they have to," said Nilda Weglarz, a spokeswoman for the nation's largest long-distance provider. "Any AT&T customer who makes long-distance calls should be on a calling plan." AT&T says a substantial number of its subscribers make no long-distance calls. More frequent callers do tend to use calling plans, cutting rates to 15 cents a minute or less. In 1992, 72 percent of residential calling minutes were charged at basic rates. As more callers have switched to calling plans, that's fallen to 25 percent of minutes. Asked why the company doesn't simply lower its rates for other customers, Ms. Weglarz said, "Our research has shown that there is a certain percentage of consumers who do not want to participate in a calling plan for whatever reason they may have. They are simply not interested." Ms. Weglarz says her relatives roll their eyes when she tries to get them to call the phone company and ask for lower rates. "I'm talking about my own family who are college-educated people and I'm saying, `What plan are you on?' and they say, `What?"' But why wouldn't people be interested in saving money? "I believe it falls in the camp of too many options," said Renee Fraser, a consumer psychologist who heads Fraser/Huff advertising in Santa Monica, Calif. AT&T alone offers an array of calling plans that many customers would find confusing. One plan, pitched on television by Mad About You star Paul Reiser, bills calls at 15 cents a minute, all the time. Another plan charges 10 cents a minute, plus a $4.95 monthly fee, with a special promotional rate of 5 cents for weekend calls if customers ask for it. (According to AT&T's Internet site, after a customer has been on the plan for six months, calls on Saturdays will cost 10 cents a minute. Sunday rates are scheduled to rise to 10 cents a minute in mid-November.) Customers can often get lower rates by signing up and receiving bills over the Internet. Other plans offer frequent-flier miles or cash for signing up. Dialing 10-10 and a three-digit code at the beginning of a call saves money sometimes but can cost more on other calls. Monthly fees and fluctuating rates make comparisons difficult. And while there always seems to be a better deal out there, there are plenty of bad ones. "People fail to take action because they believe they have little hope of finding a better solution," Ms. Fraser said. Like Ms. Perl, many customers don't realize that they're paying more than necessary. Others say they believe the savings aren't worth the risk of signing up with a bad plan. And many customers prefer the predictability of the basic service they've always had with AT&T. "There's a bit of loyalty. They've always been here and always provided good service," said one lifelong AT&T customer, who asked not to be identified by name. Winston Brown, a retired technical salesman in Dallas, never thought to check his long-distance rates until he noticed high fees for vacation calls he'd made with his telephone credit card. When he called AT&T to ask about the charges, he realized he'd been overpaying for years. "I felt like I was being ripped off. They must have six plans they can put you on, but you'd never know it," Mr. Brown said. After analyzing his calling patterns and checking with other phone companies, he switched to a plan offered by MCI WorldCom. The Public Utility Commission of Texas compares rates for several Texas phone companies at its Internet site, www.puc.state.tx.us/rates/trates.htm. More help is available from the Telecommunications Research & Action Center, a nonprofit group, at www.trac.org. But customers don't need to be Internet-savvy to find a lower rate, said Leslie Kjellstrand, spokeswoman for the Public Utility Commission. "All you have to do is pick up the phone and say, `What can you do for me?"' ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #2 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 2 22:03:06 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA12115; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:03:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:03:06 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902030303.WAA12115@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #5 TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Feb 99 22:03:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 5 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Chat Feature For Digest/Archives Users (TELECOM Digest Editor) Book Review: "Naked In Cyberspace", Carole A. Lane (Rob Slade") Telecom Update (Canada) #167, January 25, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack ("Lex") Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (John R. Levine) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Larry Conzett) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Plex Inphiniti) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Linc Madison) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Anthony Argyriou) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TELECOM Digest Editor (ptownson@telecom-digest.org) Subject: New Chat Feature For Digest/Archive Users Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:00:00 CST I want to announce a new feature for readers of the Digest, the comp.dcom.telecom* newsgroups, TELECOM_Digest_Online, and users of telecom-digest.org. A new IRC-style chat is now available for telecommunications discussion. The other 'webchat' feature I had available is still there also, but it is a webpage based chat as those of you who have used it know, and not the most popular kind of chat software. What I installed over the last weekend is a java-based IRC-style chat which functions on a more 'interactive' basis (each person sees what the other persons type immediatly) with a list of users on line, the ability to open private rooms, 'whisper' to other users, etc. In other words, an IRC arrangement. You do need to have a java-enabled browser to use this feature and if it detects that you are not java-enabled it will redirect you to the existing chat program, which is now known as 'chat-2' in the archives main menu. The IRC server is operated by xoom.com, and they have no compunction against loading their pages with commercial advertising, and when you first log in they invite you to establish a user account with them, which you are free to ignore. The chat will work with only a user name; no password or real name is needed. When using the chat, you are NOT transferred to xoom.com, and you ARE staying on telecom- digest.org; if you want to check out my source on that page you will see an 'applet' which works with xoom.com's cgi-bin. When you exit chat, there are two ways to do it: one, you can use the logout button provided on the chat window, and this very thoughtfully drops you into a window from xoom.com where you will need to *close that window* to get back to telecom (the 'back' button on your browser will not get you back to telecom. Two, you can just exit the page; when the chat decides you are not around any longer after five or ten minutes it will drop you anyway. Just remember that a 'clean' logout will get you to xoom.com and you don't need to do this unless you are really concerned about your screen name hanging around for a few minutes after you have departed. If you *are already a member of xoom.com* you can use your existing name there and password. Since user names and passwords are shared across all the xoom.com chat rooms (they have hundreds of them, I am just running this one from here rather than on their site) by signing up with them (then ignoring their mountains of spam which begins arriving almost immediatly) you can select an unused user name and password protect it for use on this telecom chat. For instance if you try logging in as townsonp1 which is my admin name for the room, you are told that name requires a password. So if by chance you happen to grow fond of my little telecom chat room and want to establish a user name that won't get misappropriated, sign up with xoom.com using that username, and henceforth when you login to my chat room here, you will find your username is also password protected. It was either accept the advertising which appears on the bottom of the chat window (not that offensive), accept having users dropped off at their site when they make a clean logout from chat, and having them control the passwords server-wide for all chat rooms (meaning you will find a great many common names for which 'a password is required to use this name' -- or -- buy the generic software from them, sell my own ads for the space at the bottom (or go without ads) and most important find someone willing to install it in their cgi-bin for me ... and I haven't the heart to ask lcs.mit.edu to do much more for me than they are already doing. I do not think a java-based chat running on their site for people to use, abuse and misuse is in their plans for this year. So, live with it. Unlike IRC, commands begin with an asterisk * with the exception of /help. I'll appreciate your feedback and I hope this chat program is more useful than the old one which is also still around. http://telecom-digest.org/chatroom.html http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/chatroom.html Same difference, only the first one is shorter, or just do http://telecom-digest.org and look the whole thing over if you have not been around in awhile. Cute bug: do NOT however try http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives which is also the same difference except to the new IRC-style chat. The room, you see, had to be registered with xoom.com, and if the software there gets a call for my IRC channel from anyone other than 'hyperarchive' it lets out a screech about 'an imposter has taken over this room!' It will run the room, but keeps insisting that whoever is running the room on their web page is not authorized to do so. This even happens if 'massis' makes the call. I am going to see if I can register it to *.lcs.mit.edu but I am not sure if I can. Anyway that was my project this past weekend. If someone wants to purchase the software and run it at their site for me thus avoiding the advertisments, etc please do. I will name the room after you. :) remember: http://telecom-digest.org/chatroom.html PAT ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 08:24:00 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Naked In Cyberspace", Carole A. Lane Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKNKDCSP.RVW 981122 "Naked In Cyberspace", Carole A. Lane, 1997, 0-910965-17-X, U$29.95 %A Carole A. Lane %C 462 Danbury Road, Wilton, CT 06897-2126 %D 1997 %G 0-910965-17-X %I Pemberton Press Books/Online Inc. %O U$29.95 800-248-8466 203-761-1466 fax: 203-761-1444 %O johnb@onlineinc.com www.onlineinc.com/pempress %P 544 p. %T "Naked In Cyberspace: How to Find Personal Information Online" Oh, go and stand over in the corner with Senator Exon. Those reading the title (and the promotional reviews in many magazines) might be forgiven for thinking this was an examination of the state of privacy or personal information online. Those who get to the subtitle will probably think that this will tell you how to find personal information on the net. The second group will be a lot closer than the first, but won't really be correct either. Part one is a kind of general introduction to the topic: basically it seems to be a kind of promotional brochure. Chapter one states that information can be valuable (surprise), that information can be accessed in various ways via computers (double surprise), and gives a kind of randomized table of contents for the book. One point to be made is that the text seems to hold "cyberspace" and "online" as synonymous with "involves a computer," since chapter two starts talking about searching databases by emphasizing the importance of the speed of your computer. It goes on to talk about CD-ROMs, give a minimalist description of boolean logic, pass briefly over the fact that computer databases may contain mistakes (many estimates suggest that a quarter to a third of all such records are in error), and finishes by extolling the virtues of information brokers. The author is obviously not comfortable with searching for information on the Internet: we are told of all kinds of trivial information (nothing important) that can be found on the net, but never how, in chapter three. Chapter four suggests that you can find information about people from proprietary databases, and finishes with a hard-hitting, in-depth investigation of Ross Perot -- using the information found on his promotional Web site! The obligation to talk about privacy is given a token nod in chapter five, which primarily emphasizes the fact that information obtainable via computer could be obtained other ways so don't gimme no grief about this book, OK? Part two looks at what you might use record searching for. Chapter six looks at finding people, but almost as soon as it starts it admits that the options in this category are too many, and that it can only give you a random, and extremely limited, sampling. Pre-employment screening is discussed in chapter seven, but almost none of it relates to computer accessible records at all. Recruiting is limited to searching online (and usually commercial) resume banks in chapter eight. The job related newsgroups aren't mentioned at all, and there is no talk of using topical searches to find specialist skills. Tenant screening is limited to credit referencing (which it doesn't tell you how to do) in chapter nine. Chapter ten lists some proprietary databases where you might be able to find out about assets, and has a much longer section dealing with assets that you won't be able to find. "Competitive Intelligence" (aka "industrial espionage"?) again has nothing to say about computers (and very little to say at all) in chapter eleven. (Appropriate number, don't you think?) There are some proprietary databases, and even some publicly available resources, in chapter twelve for finding experts in different fields, although, again, only a tiny sample. How to find rich people to hit up for charity is minuscule in chapter thirteen. The review of private investigation doesn't give you any resources beyond how to contact PI professional groups. Part three looks at types of personal records. These include chapters on biographies, general indices, telephone directories, staff and professional directories, mailing lists, news, photographic images, quotations, bank records, credit and financial records, consumer credit records, criminal justice records, motor vehicles, death, tax records, medical and insurance records, public records, adoption, celebrity, genealogical records, political records, and demographic records. Most of the information is contained in proprietary databases, and much of it is not available via computer at all, let alone online. The best chapter, in terms of comprehensive and useful guidance combined with accessible data, is on genealogy. The remainder of the book is essentially appendices, listing related books, periodicals, organizations, and databases. Basically, this work spends a lot of time suggesting that you *can* find information out about people, and doesn't put much effort into telling you how you can. There is a heavy reliance on commercial information services, and, as noted, not all of the information sources are available to you from home, let alone via the Internet. A great deal of data relating to the topics covered *can* be found on the Internet, but the author does not appear to be aware of that. If you want to set yourself up as an information broker, this text might get you started. The contact information for the various database sources is useful, although you can find the same at your local library. Which may be available online. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKNKDCSP.RVW 981122 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 11:46:29 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #167, January 25, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 167: January 25, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Shareholders Approve BCT.Telus Merger ** PSINet Plans National Fiber Network ** Executive Shakeup at AT&T Canada ** Sprint Bundles LD and Internet ** International Licenses Issued ** Bell Offers to Change Operator Plan ** Cableco Internet Services Gain Ground ** Bell Proposes ADSL Compromise ** Cantel Extends "Local Calling" to Hong Kong ** CRTC Rejects Free Wireless Listing Trial ** InfoInterActive Patents Internet Call Waiting ** Comment Sought on New Affiliate Rules ** Telcos Need Not Provide Payphone Location List ** Oral Arguments in High-Cost Proceeding ** New-Media Final Arguments to Be Heard February 3 ** BC Tel Winback Promos: Win One, Lose One ** Access Telecom to Offer CPC Payphones ** NBTel Announces E-Commerce Products ** BCE Emergis Plans U.S. Acquisition ** Optel Hires Two Ex-Fonorola Execs ** Sprint Vs. Sprint ============================================================ SHAREHOLDERS APPROVE BCT.TELUS MERGER: On January 19, Telus shareholders voted 99.44% in favor of merger with BC Telecom. Two days later, the merger was approved by 99.99% of BC Telecom shareholders. The deal closes January 31. ** BC Telecom reports fourth quarter net earnings of $87.4 Million, a 23% increase from last year. Revenues rose 5.8% to $817 Million. PSINET PLANS NATIONAL FIBER NETWORK: Internet Service Provider PSINet says it will spend more than $100 Million to assemble a high-speed fiber network across Canada. On January 20, PSINet paid $12 Million for rights to a Vancouver-Seattle fiber link. EXECUTIVE SHAKEUP AT AT&T CANADA: Three senior executives left AT&T Canada last week: Carole Salomon, President, Residential Long Distance Services; Karen Jeisi, Senior VP, Law and External Relations; and Anil Amlani, Senior VP, Industrial Relations. SPRINT BUNDLES LD AND INTERNET: For $24.95 a month, Sprint Canada's new The Most Anytime plan offers residential customers Canadian long distance calling for 10 cents a minute anytime, and unlimited use of Sprint's Internet access service. INTERNATIONAL LICENSES ISSUED: The CRTC has already approved 78 international telecommunications licenses -- 48 Class A (providers which operate international facilities) and 35 Class B (no facilities). More approvals are expected shortly. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1999/8190/8190-99.htm BELL OFFERS TO CHANGE OPERATOR PLAN: Bell Canada says it will consider retaining majority ownership in the new company which is taking over its operator services business. The telco says that lower salary scales and a reduction in the number of call centers will be implemented gradually, not all at once. (See Telecom Update #166) CABLECO INTERNET SERVICES GAIN GROUND: The number of subscribers to Internet services offered by cablecos Shaw, Rogers, and Cogeco has roughly doubled since September. Most recent subscriber totals: Shaw, 81,000 (January 14); Rogers, 54,000 (December 31); Cogeco, 22,000 (January 15); Videotron, 8,500 (November 30). BELL PROPOSES ADSL COMPROMISE: Bell Canada is proposing to allow Internet Service Providers to share some of the facilities needed to provide ADSL, thus reducing the cost of providing the service to their customers. ** Some of the documents on the dispute can be found at http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1998/8646/c51-01.html CANTEL EXTENDS "LOCAL CALLING" TO HONG KONG: Cantel AT&T Digital One Rate now includes calls to Hawaii, Alaska, and Hong Kong in its flat-rate long distance calling plans. CRTC REJECTS FREE WIRELESS LISTING TRIAL: The CRTC has turned down Bell Canada's plan to offer free white page listings to Bell Mobility subscribers. The telco described the plan as a market trial, but the CRTC said it was a promotion which discriminated against other wireless companies. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/telecom/order/199/o9933_.txt INFOINTERACTIVE PATENTS INTERNET CALL WAITING: Halifax-based InfoInterActive has been granted a Canadian patent for its Internet call waiting service. Several Canadian telcos offer a competing service developed by Northern Telecom. COMMENT SOUGHT ON NEW AFFILIATE RULES: In Public Notice 99-3, the CRTC asks whether it should establish new rules to restrict local service resale by Stentor company affiliates, or international resale by Teleglobe affiliates. To comment, notify the Commission by February 19. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-03.htm TELCOS NEED NOT PROVIDE PAYPHONE LOCATION LIST: The CRTC has turned down an application by Canquest to require Stentor telcos to provide the locations of their card-reader equipped public telephones. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0032.htm ORAL ARGUMENTS IN HIGH-COST PROCEEDING: On Monday, January 25, the CRTC begins hearing oral final arguments on how to ensure that telephone service in high-cost serving areas is available and affordable. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1997/part7/pn97 -42.html NEW-MEDIA FINAL ARGUMENTS TO BE HEARD FEBRUARY 3: The CRTC will begin hearing oral final arguments in the New-Media proceeding (Broadcasting PN 1998-82-1/Telecom PN 1998-20-1) in Hull on February 3. Comments in the proceeding are posted at http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_br/notices/1998-82e.htm and http://www.newmedia-forum.net/news/. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1998/8045/p98-20-1.html#dir BC TEL WINBACK PROMOS: WIN ONE, LOSE ONE: The CRTC has approved one BC Tel promotion aiming to win local business customers back, and turned down another. The Commission reiterates that telcos must not approach individual customers with winback offers within three months of their move to a local competitor. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0060.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0034.htm ACCESS TELECOM TO OFFER CPC PAYPHONES: Montreal-based Access Telecom Technologies will market Canada Payphone payphones and Internet terminals in Quebec. NBTEL ANNOUNCES E-COMMERCE PRODUCTS: NBTel has announced two additions to its Intellis suite of e-commerce products. Merchant enables Web-based sales; Internet Contact Services lets call center agents and customers converse on the Web. BCE EMERGIS PLANS U.S. ACQUISITION: BCE Emergis, formerly Mpact Immedia, has received $49 Million in equity investment from parent Bell Canada and plans to use it to acquire a U.S. e-commerce company. OPTEL HIRES TWO EX-FONOROLA EXECS: Competitive Local Exchange Carrier Optel Communications has appointed Mac Bargout as Senior Vice-President of Engineering and Russ La Rose as Senior Vice-President of Network Operations. Both previously held similar posts at Fonorola. SPRINT VS. SPRINT: In the January issue of Telemanagement, Ian Angus investigates a new long distance calling plan and finds a familiar carrier behind it. Also in Telemanagement #161: ** Rob Slade's "Bookshelf" provides a guide to Internet guidebooks. ** Henry Dortmans offers 10 questions that will show whether your telecom operations are "billing-error prone." To subscribe to Telemanagement, call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225, or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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: Lex Subject: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 08:11:44 -0500 Organization: Netcom Canada I want to use patch panels and 25 pair cable to link our equipment racks with the TELCO demarc point. At present we just string a CAT5 cable from the demarc to the piece of equipment in question (~30-40 feet). Needless to say the under floor gets pretty messy with all the cables. So, the question is can I use CAT5 25 pair to link the 2 patch panels or do I have to use 25 pair individually shielded pairs to avoid cross talk between the receiving and transmitting pairs? Thank you in advance. lvonader@netcom.ca ------------------------------ Date: 02 Feb 1999 20:54:37 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you > and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. You are correct, give or take exceptions for non-profits. If you can figure out who was responsible for the robo-call, under 47 USC 227 you can sue them for $500, possibly tripled to $1500. This is the same law that forbids junk faxes. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: Larry Conzett Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 04:43:16 GMT Organization: @Home Network "Michael A. Covington" wrote: > I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you > and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. I believe that is regulated on a state by state basis. In Tennessee, the TN Public Service Commission passed a state regulation over 10 years ago which requires that any company that wishes to use a mechanical device to announce information on a call made to you must first request your acceptance of that call by a person prior to allowing the device to announce its message. Busi- nesses breaking this regulation are subject to $500 per incident (phone call) fine. And they do prosecute when given enough information to investigate. This holds true even with automated announcers for volunteer fire member call outs, alarm company recordings or automated polling machines. It is broad enough to include "war dialers", as well, used by individuals, rather than companies. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let me ask you how the Tennessee authorities expect an individual or business with a security alarm system installed in their home/business to possibly be able to request in advance of the police/fire/security alarm dispatch office permission to play the automated transmission announcing a fire or break-in at the premises, etc. At our bus station we have such a system from Ameritech Security Link. When the station is closed, the alarm is turned on. If someone breaks in or a fire starts, the system makes a call to the Ameritech dispatch office which in turn calls the police/fire department. If I or someone was here to first use the phone to 'request permission to play a recorded transmission' what need would I have for the alarm system? Are you certain in Tenessee that security alarms are not exempt from the requirement that a live person first get permission to play a message? What about an old person with one of those panic button things you can carry in your pocket within a range of a few hundred feet of the receiver which is hooked in the phone line? They have a heart attack and before they die they barely have time to reach in their pocket, grab the little device and press the button on it .. who is going to do their live talking for them? PAT] ------------------------------ From: plex_inphiniti@yahoo.com (Plex Inphiniti) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 00:29:34 GMT Organization: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:31:21 -0500, Michael A. Covington wrote: > I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you > and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. Just > now I got a call from one, an outfit called VPT that sells pagers. > The only identifying information given was the 800 number, > 1-800-388-2161, repeated many times. The Caller ID said only "out of > area." I was pretty sure those are illegal. They laws around it are I believe a human has to initiate the call and ask you personally if they can play a recording. I may be wrong. -= Plex Inphiniti =- ****plex_inphiniti@yahoo.com Email Address spam trapped. Remove **** for email reply. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:12:31 -0800 From: Telecom@LincMad.NOSPAM.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Organization: LincMad Consulting There is a California state law that forbids such calls, but, of course, it only applies if the origin is within California. I got a couple of such calls, from the same telemarketing outfit, at 2:45 a.m. on Thanksgiving Day, and then at 4:45 a.m. on a Sunday. Yes, that's a.m. as in "wee hours of the morning," between midnight and dawn. The telco was absolutely unhelpful in giving me any way to deal with the problem, other than trying very aggressively to sell me Caller ID service, which I am 99.9% sure would be of no help in identifying the caller. ** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom@LincMad-com URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM" << ------------------------------ From: anthony@alphageo.com (Anthony Argyriou) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 08:08:38 GMT Organization: Alpha Geotechnical Reply-To: anthony@alphageo.com This is illegal in California, but I don't believe that it's illegal nationwide. California can't prosecute for calls which are legal in the state of origin. Anthony Argyriou ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #5 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 2 22:53:48 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA15098; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:53:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:53:48 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902030353.WAA15098@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #6 TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Feb 99 22:53:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 6 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson The Web's Identity Crisis (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "TCP/IP Complete", Ed Taylor (Rob Slade) Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell (Mark J. Cuccia) Star VM for Norstar (Jim) Does AT&T's Long Shadow Portend a Cable-Modem Monopoly? (Monty Solomon) Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly (Anthony S. Pelliccio) Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly (Ed Ellers) "Real" Telecommunication (oprempj@mail.ustrust.com) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 03:45:13 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The Web's Identity Crisis http://www.salonmagazine.com/21st/rose/1999/01/29straight2.html Intel's processor-I.D. gaffe shows how badly tech companies want to know who you are and where you live. BY SCOTT ROSENBERG | Who are you? (Yeah, you!) If you were reading this as a subscriber to a print magazine or a newspaper, I wouldn't need to ask that question: I'd know your name and where you live. I might even have your credit card number. Here on the Web, though, I truly don't know who you are. I can guess, and I can play some tricks with Internet addresses (IP numbers) and "cookies," and I can ask you to register to visit my site (with no assurance that the information you provide is accurate). But I can't honestly say I have any reliable information as to your identity. That ignorance stems from the architecture of the Internet itself, which was designed for openness, not security. If you keep this in mind as you follow the onslaught of Internet-news headlines, a lot of seemingly unrelated and confusing stories start to make a lot more sense. Consider this week's brouhaha over Intel's plan to build unique I.D. numbers into its next-generation Pentium III chip. Intel told the world that it aimed to enhance security for online transactions by giving Web users and merchants a trustworthy identity-verification system: Web sites and other Net-based software could query your processor to make sure you are who you say you are before providing access to, say, online account data or other "for your eyes only" information. Intel sells hardware, so Intel wants to build security into hardware. But the resulting scheme is phenomenally silly on the face of it: Who says I do all my Net-based work from a single computer? What if more than one person uses my computer? Aren't we moving away from the single-desktop-computer model toward a world of diverse Net-access devices, anyway? Isn't the point of Web-based businesses and services that you can access them from any available browser? What if I want to do my online banking from a public Net terminal in an airport or cafe? Privacy groups, which called for a boycott of the Pentium III under the banner "Big Brother Inside," raised other issues with Intel's numbering plan. If your processor cheerfully hands out your unique I.D. to any Web site that asks, those sites can begin to build a vast database of consumer information and behavior. The moment you provide Web merchants with your name and address to fulfill an order, they can link it to your processor I.D.; conceivably, groups of Web merchants could begin to pool their information and assemble the mother of all spam lists. While today's "cookie" files already give Web sites a chance to track you in limited ways, at least the files reside on your computer's hard drive and can be easily deleted (you can also set your browser to reject them). Intel's I.D. is indelible. Under public pressure, Intel quickly reversed course and declared that the I.D. system would be turned off by default on new computers -- you'd have to turn it on yourself for anyone to access your number. Unfortunately, such control is software-based, and thus bound to have holes that unscrupulous Web sites or creative hackers could exploit. The real problem with Intel's scheme goes beyond the technical details. The trouble is that Intel set out to design a scheme to defeat the anonymity that people take for granted on the Net -- without ever asking consumers whether they wanted it or liked it or would design it differently themselves. Intel isn't the only company or institution playing this game. A similar yearning to replace free-for-all online anonymity with controlled accountability lies behind such disparate phenomena as Microsoft's new software registration scheme and the Child Online Protection Act (COPA). Microsoft feels that, thanks to piracy, it's not making quite enough profits from sales of its Office software suite, so it has devised a new registration scheme for the software: Once you've paid your hundreds of dollars, if you wish to use your programs more than 50 times you will also have to obtain a code from Microsoft that is tied to the particular configuration of your computer's hardware. (For now the scheme will only be applied in certain foreign countries and for academic users in North America, but you can bet Microsoft would like to make it universal.) Like Intel's processor I.D., Microsoft's registration scheme aims to link your personal identity with your personal computer's identity; unlike Intel's plan, there isn't even a pretense here that there's any benefit to the user. Intel and Microsoft both want to know who you are; so, too, do the feds -- at least they want to know enough about you to check your age. In its wisdom, the U.S. government has decided that Web sites need to check visitors' I.D.s at the door before granting them access to material that anyone in any state of the union might consider "harmful to minors." Under the provisions of the Child Online Protection Act (which Salon, along with a group of other plaintiffs led by the American Civil Liberties Union, is now challenging in federal court), Web sites face $50,000-a-day fines and six-month prison terms if they fail to prevent underage visitors from accessing content that's "harmful to minors." Forget about the problem of defining that term; on a more mundane level, there's no way a Web site can card you or check your age if it doesn't know who you are. Credit card numbers alone aren't good enough -- minors can type them into a Web browser, too. That's why the COPA is such a ludicrous law. You're never going to be certain of the age of Web-site visitors until and unless you devise some kind of universal Internet I.D. scheme. And nobody wants that, right? Think again. The Intel chip I.D. tempest is a wake-up call for Net users -- a reminder that personal information is the ultimate asset in the online marketplace, and that if consumers don't defend it, companies across the board will grab it. It used to be that only Web sites with aggressive marketing schemes tried to compile detailed information on masses of users. Now we've got hardware giants like Intel and software giants like Microsoft doing the same thing. Don't doubt for a moment that the new hybrid service providers/content companies like America Online and @Home/Excite will join in, too: Unlike mere Web site operators, they know their customers' names and addresses, which helps explain why they have become Wall Street darlings. To be sure, anonymity isn't an unvarnished good. There are some online activities, like banking, where secure identities are vital. Inevitably, the online world will adopt new systems for ascertaining people's identity. The question worth fighting over is, in whose interests will the system be designed? The skyrocketing market valuations of today's big Internet companies is going to put ever greater pressure on them to deliver real profits, soon. It's a good bet that they will try to do so by gathering, using and even selling whatever information they can about the people who use their sites. As that pressure builds, don't be surprised if more ill-devised schemes like the Intel processor I.D. bubble up from the stewing Net industry. Ultimately, what consumers need is an I.D. plan that offers a good balance between the convenience of online services that know who you are and the privacy we all have a right to expect. (A good technology already exists that meets these criteria -- it's called public-key encryption, and we'd all probably be using it today except for the opposition of the FBI and other law-enforcement groups.) Companies that figure out how to deliver both convenience and privacy will win users' loyalty and prosper. Those that just try to cram I.D. schemes down the public's throat -- as Intel got caught doing this week -- will deserve all the black eyes they get. SALON | Jan. 29, 1999 - - - - - - - - - - - - E-mail Scott Rosenberg. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 08:13:37 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "TCP/IP Complete", Ed Taylor Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKTCPIPC.RVW 981119 "TCP/IP Complete", Ed Taylor, 1998, 0-07-063400-9, U$69.95 %A Ed Taylor edtaylor@aol.com zac0002@ibm.net %C 300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario L1N 9B6 %D 1998 %G 0-07-063400-9 %I McGraw-Hill Ryerson/Osborne %O U$69.95 905-430-5000 fax: 905-430-5020 louisea@McGrawHill.ca %P 607 p. + CD-ROM %T "TCP/IP Complete" Chapter one gives a not always reliable background of TCP/IP (Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol) consisting mostly of trivia with a bit of structure showing how the various parts interoperate. Address resolution and routing are the major concerns in chapter two, although it also looks at IP headers. TCP, UDP (User Datagram Protocol), and IP addressing get mentioned in chapter three. Chapter four gives brief explanations of some common Internet applications. There is a quick review of LAN design (and sinusoidal voltage graphs) in chapter five. Network component diagrams, more voltage diagrams, rack diagrams, UPS logs, net clouds, and an ad for a UPS manufacturer make up chapter six. Chapter seven finally gets into some detail on the current IPv4. This is extended into IPv6 in chapter eight, but that must itself be extended into chapter nine. Chapter ten gives extensive details on TCP while chapter eleven gives almost no information at all on UDP. X, the windowing system commonly used in a networked UNIX environment, gets a short description in chapter twelve. Chapter thirteen talks randomly about network management. Some mixed information about telnet is in chapter fourteen. There is a bit of an explanation of SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol) in chapter fifteen, and other details in sixteen. Chapter seventeen reviews a number of proprietary network management products, concentrating primarily on network cloud diagrams. Chapter eighteen gets back to some TCP/IP basics with DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol). This is followed up with DNS (Domain Name System) in chapter nineteen. The book is finished with RPC (Remote Procedure Call) in chapter twenty. The content of this text is random, poorly explained, and badly organized. There are many better books on the system, such as "Designing TCP/IP Internetworks" (cf. BKDTCPIP.RVW), the classic "Internetworking with TCP/IP" (cf. BKINTTCP.RVW), "TCP/IP Illustrated" (cf. BKTCPIPI.RVW), "IPng and the TCP/IP Protocols" (cf. BKIPNGTP.RVW), and even "TCP/IP with Windows NT Illustrated" (cf. BKTCPNTI.RVW). I really can't see any audience that would particularly benefit from this book over the others. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKTCPIPC.RVW 981119 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 10:21:17 -0600 Organization: Tulane University Bell Canada's plan to turn its operator services over to (US-based) Excell Agency is more of a joint-management and labor/union/wage issue, rather than a telco network issue. My understanding, from reading the various online articles from Canadian news services, and asking people with Bell Canada, is that the current operators will be: - offered early retirement - offered other positions within Bell Canada - transferred into the *JOINT VENTURE* entity, owned by Excell and Bell Also, there *is* planned to be a certain amount of "network reconfiguration" regarding Bell Canada's Operator Services. Presently, Bell Canada has about twenty Operator Centers throughout Ontario and Quebec, where the actual operators and their DMS-200-TOPS Terminals are located. Bell intends to reduce the number of Operator Centers down to about five - two in Quebec and three in Ontario. The operator reached at these centers (when dialing '0', or cutting through to a live operator on 0+/01+ or 1-800-555-1111 "Canada Long Distance / Canada Direct" Access) will be an employee of the "joint venture" between Bell and Excell. Bell Canada's Operator Services are **NOT** going to be 'relocated' to Excell Agency's Arizona (USA) HQ's! Bell Canada will probably still maintain their twenty or so DMS-200-TOPS switching computers throughout Ontario and Quebec, although even these 'could' be consolidated some. AT&T in the US presently has about 35 #5E-OSPS switching computers in specific locations, and when one dials '00', 0+/01+ or one of several AT&T 800- access numbers, one routes to their "homing" OSPS machine. Yet when one needs to speak live to a real human being AT&T Operator, one can be routed to _ANY_ available operator anywhere in the (continental) US. I don't know how many Operator Centers AT&T presently has, but I'd read about a year ago that AT&T's ultimate intent is to consolidate and reduce the number down to JUST SIX centers. BTW, Excell in Arizona (USA) is the same company which AT&T has contracted with to provide "pseudo" directory services, rather than AT&T routing to the genuine local telco's directory operator. When one dials (US)NPA+555-1212 via the AT&T network these days, one does _NOT_ route to the real local telco directory operator in that dialed (US) Area Code. Instead, AT&T _TRAPS_ the call and routes it to Excell (which does NOT live up to their name) in Arizona. Other (US) long distance carriers are now doing the very same thing with one or another contract company. These contract directory companies (including Excell) are HORRIBLY out of date in their directory listings, and have all other kinds of erroneous or missing information. If one needs real local telco directory, some long distance carriers (LCI/Qwest still does at this time) still route to the real LEC directory operator of the dialed area code. I am _NOT_ going to use these contract companies, first paying for a directory call and only getting bogus information, and then paying toll to use that bogus info?! Where's the FCC and the FTC in this matter! Mark J. Cuccia ------------------------------ From: Jim Subject: Star VM for Norstar Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 15:47:25 -0600 Organization: SBTek, Inc. Is anyone using a voice mail system called Star VM made by Telephony Experts for the Norstsar key system? I'd like to hear from anyone that is regarding some problems I'm having such as disconnects during announcements, etc. Thanks, Jim Please remove the "extrajunk" in the address before replying. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 12:55:34 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Does AT&T's Long Shadow Portend a Cable-Modem Monopoly? Excerpt from The Industry Standard's Media Grok - February 02, 1999 Groundhog Day: Does AT&T's Long Shadow Portend a Cable-Modem Monopoly? Though the Baby Bells awoke on Groundhog Day with Ma Bell's shadow creeping over them in local phone service (via Time Warner's cable), most prognosticators predicted a few more years of techno-headaches until AT&T chewed into their monopolies. While the major outlets were trying to swallow the complex joint venture between AT&T and Time Warner, MSNBC's David Bowermaster was asking the relevant follow-up: Will Ma Bell now push TW's speedy cable-modem service Road Runner into a merger with AtHome (which AT&T will control through TCI)? One analyst told Bowermaster it was inevitable, and that "it makes no economic sense for the cable industry to have two high-speed data companies. All it really does is give you duplicative overhead and duplicative expenses." And AtHome CEO Tom Jermoluk hinted in an old interview with MSNBC that the combo was "compelling," but that, vaguely, "the business issues are significant." Bowermaster figures that once AT&T gets its IP act together, the Road Runner-AtHome merger might be more appealing. The Wall Street Journal emphasized the local phone market angle in a long piece by Leslie Cauley and Rebecca Blumenstein. Some markets, including New York, could see a 25-percent discount in local phone rates when AT&T pushes into service, said the company. The Baby Bells cried foul in the WSJ piece and gave every indication they'd run to the regulators for redress. Meanwhile, the New York Times fronted a second-day report from Seth Schiesel explaining the financial details of the AT&T-TW venture. The San Jose Mercury News' Jon Healey was upfront with caveats for consumers on savings: Only big spenders would get discounts, and there would be less choice. An AT&T spokesman admitted the promised 20 percent discount would only come by getting extra lines or features like caller ID or call waiting. Still, Healey found that competition in local phone service would likely bring lower rates for everyone, as competition has driven down long distance and wireless. But while AT&T's bringing some competition, it's also taking it away, according to Healey. "On the Time Warner networks, consumers will not be able to choose any local or long-distance phone service but AT&T's for the 20-year life of the joint venture, officials said." A High Speed Cable Colossus? http://www.msnbc.com/news/237286.asp Time Warner Joins With AT&T to Sell Local Phone Service http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/financial/att-time.html AT&T Steps Closer to Local Service Through Accord With Time Warner http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB917874681624942500.htm AT&T Joins Warner in Telephone, TV Venture http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-02/02/053r-020299-idx.html AT&T, Time Warner Teaming Up http://www.mercurycenter.com/business/top/058305.htm AT&T, Time Warner in Phone Deal http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/current/telecom.htx ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo@nospam.ultranet.com (Anthony Steven Pelliccio) Subject: Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 19:28:39 -0500 Organization: Providence Network Partners In article , tad@ssc.com says... > Jan. 5--If you've ever wondered what it would be worth to rid yourself > of pesky, dinner-interrupting telemarketers, Ameritech has the answer: > $3.95 a month. > Beginning today, Ameritech will roll out its new Privacy Manager > service in three Indiana cities -- Indianapolis, Gary and > Hammond. While the service costs $3.95 a month, it requires Caller ID > with Name to work, which costs an extra $9.50 a month. Gaaacckk! $9.50 for CLID/N? It's $4.95 here and I thought Bell Atlantic was gouging us. ------------------------------ From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 12:58:52 -0500 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com Discussions start here Tad Cook quoted from an Indianapolis Star story: > "Beginning today, Ameritech will roll out its new Privacy Manager > service in three Indiana cities -- Indianapolis, Gary and > Hammond. While the service costs $3.95 a month, it requires Caller > ID with Name to work, which costs an extra $9.50 a month. > "That's too much, says a telemarketing group, arguing that consumers > can get pretty much the same result by being firm with telemarketers > and asking to be removed from calling lists." I have to agree here -- if Privacy Manager presents a voice message to the called party, there's no reason to require Caller ID (with name or not) because the Caller ID display unit doesn't enter into the operation! ------------------------------ From: oprempj@mail.ustrust.com Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 11:24:58 -0500 Reply-To: oprempj@mail.ustrust.com Subject: "Real" Telecommunication Organization: IBM.NET I have been in this business for many years. I have come to the conclusion that, to the detriment of American business, we are a dying breed. It seems like there's no one left to defend our turf. I feel like Don Quioti. Case in point: The current state of "lan" communications is one of chaos. This only benefits the manufactures who are taking business on a roller coaster ride. Our choices are: ethernet, token-ring, fast ethernet, gigabit ethernet, and ATM. Think about this. What are these choices good for? Since when do we decide on the design before we know what the purpose is? For the LAN, none of these choices amounts to a hill of beans. Doesn't anyone know that?! The PURPOSE of a telecommunications network, specifically, the local area network is to facilitate communications among and between two or more "stations" or end nodes. This function is done best when the SYSTEM is transparent to protocols, applications, and media. Suppose you couldn't place a voice call unless you spoke English! This is exactly the state of voice communications over a hundred years ago in the USA. This is the current state data communications, specifically, local area network communications. Think about this: in order to "improve" or upgrade my local area network I must change my NIC, modify my applications, change my media type, swap out hubs, routers, switches, etc.......... This is stupid. The fact that computer types have won over the minds, the hearts, and the pocketbooks of corporate America is completely due to your ineffectiveness as a telecommunications profession. For the sake of American business and your careers, it is time to fight back! Let's put together a strategy to put telecommunications back in charge of telecommunications and networking in particular. If you feel as I do, let's start a dialog. P.S. I am NOT interested in arguing about computer people versus telecom people. This is not the puppies of this group. This group is for embattled telecommunications professions who want to work together for their own and the country's better interest. For the purposes of weeding out the "noise", i define a telecommunications profession as one who is well versed in the theory and practice of telecommunications principles. Anyone who uses the term "switching bridge" is automatically excluded. (:-D ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #6 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 3 21:22:40 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA10689; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 21:22:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 21:22:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902040222.VAA10689@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #7 TELECOM Digest Wed, 3 Feb 99 21:22:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 7 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Wireless Dimension - Cell Phones and Wireless Phone Leader (Mike Pollock) 609 in New Jersey to Split (Carl Moore) What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare (Brian Vita) Re: The Web's Identity Crisis (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Quicken Family Lawyer Banned in Texas (Monty Solomon) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Mel Beckman) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (digger) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Stewart Irwin) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Matthew E. Pearson) New Telecom Chat Room Available in Archives (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Pollock Subject: Wireless Dimension - Cell Phones and Wireless Phone Leader Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:42:44 -0500 [TELECOM Digest Editor's note: The site discussed below functions in much the same way as the print publication {Consumer Reports} with a fairly unbiased look at phones, etc. Readers might want to check it out. PAT] The following site was mentioned today on Dave Ross' syndicated radio feature "Chip Talk" http://www.wirelessdimension.com/ Fact sheet POINTS OF DIFFERENCE Covering virtually every available wireless phone and service plan in the top 50 U.S. metropolitan areas, which include thousands of communities nationwide, Wireless Dimension is the most comprehensive one-stop, shopping service for wireless consumers: The only service allowing users to research, compare and buy wireless phones and service plans. The only service that lets consumers compare virtually all available wireless phones and service plans. The only intelligent shopping agent to recommend wireless products and services based on consumers individual needs. The only guide to cover analog, digital cellular and PCS phones. Identifies local authorized dealers and covers compatible accessories. A free, objective and anonymous service. Wireless Dimension is the most highly-targeted, one-to-one marketing resource for carriers and manufacturers: Targets pre-qualified consumers shopping for wireless products and captures their buying preferences. Reduces carriers customer acquisition costs (cost per gross addition) by more than 30 percent per transaction. The Dimension Select advertising system, unlike banner ads, bills advertisers on a per-delivery basis. TWO DIFFERENT WAYS TO USE WIRELESS DIMENSION Service Plan: In minutes, view virtually all service plans in your area, compare them side-by-side and view the local coverage map of each carrier shown. Phone: Research all available analog cellular, digital cellular and PCS phones, including those that match specific carriers and compare them side-by-side. Includes markets/phones and all standard air interfaces (AMPS, N-AMPS, GSM, CDMA, TDMA, iDEN). FEATURES AND FUNCTIONS Research tools: The only database offering virtually all available service plans and phones. An easy-to-read glossary of more than 800 telecommunications terms. Frequently asked questions on a variety of wireless categories. News and feature articles. Side-by-side comparison: A side-by-side comparison grid helps you quickly compare a selection of products and services from different manufacturers. Detailed product information: Once you identify a selection of specific service plans or phones, you can read detailed features and specifications information to narrow your choice. Buy now option: Once you identify service plans and phones of interest, you have the option to buy directly from a participating carrier online through Wireless Dimension. Find retailers and authorized dealers: Identify local authorized dealers through the Locate Retailer function. Coverage maps: View the coverage areas of local service plans. Shopping list: Use this personal portfolio to save and access information. You can print out product and service information, or proceed with an online purchase at any time. TARGET AUDIENCE Wireless consumers with Internet access. Marketing decision-makers for carriers, manufacturers and retailers targeting wireless consumers. PLATFORMS AND TECHNOLOGIES Wireless Dimension was built using the Microsoft Windows NT Server 4.0 operating system, Microsoft SQL Server 6.5 enterprise database development system, Microsoft Internet Information Server, and extensive custom server and client-side code. The system runs on multiple Compaq ProLiant and Dell PowerEdge servers. Must be viewed with Netscape Navigator 3.01 or higher and Microsoft Internet Explorer 3.02 or higher. Service is available 24 hours a day and designed to exceed 98 percent uptime. Complex query response times are held below 10 seconds and maintain an average of five seconds via a 14.4 Kb/s modem connection, despite extremely large data sets and high number of users. NTH DIMENSION MANAGEMENT TEAM Court Lorenzini, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer Doug DeSantis, Co-Founder, Publisher and President Paul Kowalski, Vice President, Finance Matthew Ellenthal, Vice President, Sales Thomas Gonser, Jr., Senior Vice President, Business Development Dave Cash, Executive Editor Andrew Pope, Director of Technology Peg English, Strategic Growth Manager ABOUT PARENT NTH DIMENSION CORPORATION Nth Dimension Corporation, an online publisher of comparison shopping services, was formed in 1995 by Chief Executive Officer Court Lorenzini, formerly with Cisco Systems, and President and Publisher Doug DeSantis, formerly with Microsoft. The company is headquartered in Bothell, Wash., near Seattle. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 15:04:48 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: 609 in New Jersey to Split KYW news-radio reports today that splitting 609 geographically has been approved. The new area code, not yet known, will go to the western part (Camden etc., near Philadelphia), and 609 will remain in the eastern part, including Atlantic City. I didn't catch where Trenton, the state capital, will end up. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 08:16:37 -0500 From: Brian Vita Subject: What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare Last summer, after having been a very satisfied AT&T customer since the beginning of time, our company was hosed by AT&T. We had been in a term contract with them for the previous 3 years that gave us a LD rate of $0.094/minute for all of our inbound and outbound traffic. The contract expired in March without us being immediately aware. Without warning, AT&T brought our rate up to $0.27/minute. Unfortu- nately this increase happened at a time that our business had also increased so the jump wasn't as immediately obvious as it might have otherwise been. In the past we had an account rep with them who contacted us every 6 months or so and compared the services that we had and were using with new or more current offerings. We hadn't seen her for over a year. When I tried to reach her I was told that her entire department (Small Business Development or something of the like) had been closed and that we now had to deal with a national customer service center. The national customer service center was virtually impossible to reach. If you called their "800" line you were only given options for repair or discussing a late payment on your bill, both of which dumped you into an automated device for telling you how much you owed or reporting a line outage. When I finally reached a service rep, she said that the new rate was $.17/minute, take it or leave it. After protesting and asking for a supervisor, I was finally offered a rate in the $0.15 range. I pushed harder and went through a couple of sales offices and, after several non-returned phone calls, was reluctantly offered a rate of $0.109/minute. We declined. We switched to a company called NOS Communications who presented themselves as a wholly owned subsidiary of Willtel. They offered me a rate of $0.079/minute and a $0.15/minute calling card rate. The first sign of trouble should have been the fact that they not only switched the lines that I authorized them to, but also every other line in my or my company's name. I read them the riot act on this and they corrected the problem. The next problem appeared when the first bill arrived and I found that they were billing me in TCU's and ECU's instead of minutes. Their call billing method is a Byzantine system that was deliberately set up to obfuscate the actual calling rate and cost. They send an explanation that is written in a very pale (non-repro) blue ink in 8 point type on a very small piece of paper in legal double talk. From what I could actually make out on the page, it appeared that we were actually paying a rate of $0.10 +/- /minute. Having bigger projects to deal with, I put aside the bills for later analysis. I've just completed an audit of the bill and it appears that we were actually paying about $0.25/minute. The rep that I have been dealing with at the company is suddenly no longer with the company. Needless to say, I'm leaving them as soon as I can switch all of my lines. I plan of filing complaints with the FCC Common Carrier Complaint Bureau and the Massachusetts AG's office for deceptive business practices. I would be interested in hearing from others, particularly in Mass that have had similar problems. At this time, the likely contender for our LD service appears to be Qwest Communications. I would be interested in hearing any feedback that users may have about them. I do not want to receive solicitations from independent agents or resellers. If you send me unsolicited email you will not get my business. Brian T. Vita, President Cinema Service & Supply, Inc. 75 Walnut St. Peabody, MA 01960-5626 (800)231-8849 - Sales (US & Canada) (800)329-2775 - Sales Fax (US & Canada) (978)538-7575 - Business Office (978)538-7550 - Business Office Fax www.cssinc.com ****Visit our new online web store!**** ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Web's Identity Crisis Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 13:43:07 GMT > Intel sells hardware, so Intel wants to build security into hardware. > But the resulting scheme is phenomenally silly on the face of it: Who > says I do all my Net-based work from a single computer? What if more > than one person uses my computer? Aren't we moving away from the > single-desktop-computer model toward a world of diverse Net-access > devices, anyway? Isn't the point of Web-based businesses and services > that you can access them from any available browser? What if I want to > do my online banking from a public Net terminal in an airport or cafe? More to the point, you'll need software to transmit the information in the hardware. How hard will it be for me to spoof that information? I don't see the point. -Joel (joel@exc.com) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the catch is, the 'average' user on the internet these days would not know how to spoof the information. You would, I probably could do it, and many readers here would figure it out. But all of us combined would be a very small percentage of the total number of users who attempt to defraud (for example) America Online in a year's time with bogus credit card and/or checking account information. That's not to say I approve of Intel's plan -- since abandoned I understand -- because I do not, but if they went through with it, then it, along with other techniques for online fraud prention/detection which a even just a decade ago would never have occurred to the security experts will trim the level of fraud back another notch or so. I really think in the case of AOL they bring on a lot of their own problems through their abysmal lack of security with user screen names. Let's consider the trivial issue of chatting on line. When one screen name becomes too polluted for whatever reason, a user just ditches it and starts another one. Because of the font style they chose to use for things like their Instant Message service, there is no difference at all between a lower case 'l' (el) and an upper case 'I' (eye). Users are forever harassing one another there by assuming look-closely-alike screen names of other users then acting out in an inappropriate way. One user bans another from sending messages so the banned user simply picks a new screen name and starts all over. At least with Compuserve, where screen names are also encouraged in chat, each user has an !absolute! unchangable user number as well which can be viewed at any time in a chat by issuing a certain command. So be whatever screen name you like and change it at will, but if you get on my case, I'll block the user *number* from any further transaction with me, or I'll treat the chat contents in the context of what I know about that number. I would not mind seeing each user of the net have a unique, difficult to create number assigned to them as long as identifying information as to name, address, type of computer, etc did not have to be associated except as the owner chose to do so at various web sites or on chat programs. I do not need your name and address to know that the last time you visited my web site you made a commotion and I had to forbid you to visit me in the future. As with Compuserve where the user ID numbers don't relate to anything another user can conven- iently deal with, they none the less are tamper proof ways of either establishing a good or bad reputation in the net community. I would assign the number to *users* rather than *computers* so that the fellow who uses a public terminal in the airport can get on line with no hassle. I'd make it part of the password; let's say the last eight or ten digits; it would be the only part of the password to travel around the net with the user. Either that, or maybe there could be a push for more use of encrypted signatures which anyone could verify through a place where the keys were kept. In other words, having a *little bit* of user identification for general security purposes is not a bad idea to me as long as the user's true identity and address, etc would not be known except where the user wanted them to be known. As always, so many of my ideas depends upon the ability and willingness of system admins to cooperate and work with each other on the theory 'a bad thing happened at site X, it could happen to me; I cannot prevent it without cooperation from admin X which means I have to cooperate with him in the same way.' Where unix admins, particularly in the .edu domain are concerned, you generally see that attitude. If a security hole is found, word travels around quickly and patches are implemented. If a user acts out at one place before long the others know of him. Unfortunatly, the internet today consists of .com by the carload, and everyone save his own skin and damn all the rest of you. A sad sight, this internet. :( PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 03:23:48 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Quicken Family Lawyer Banned in Texas http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,31783,00.html Judge bars Intuit legal software By Dan Goodin Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 1, 1999, 6:40 p.m. PT A federal judge has banned the sale or distribution of a legal software title in Texas, saying that the program violates a state statute barring the unauthorized practice of law. In a case brought by the committee responsible for enforcing the Texas statute, U.S. District Judge Barefoot Sanders in Dallas held that Quicken Family Lawyer (QFL), a program that aids users in filling out wills, leases, and other legal documents, goes well beyond the mere provision of factual information about the legal system. The decision could give Texas enforcers new ammunition in their investigation of Nolo Press and other companies that offer similar "self-help" legal products. "While no single one of QFL's acts, in and of itself, may constitute the practice of law, taken as a whole [the software goes] beyond publishing a sample form book with instructions, and has ventured into the unauthorized practice of law," Sanders wrote. In explaining his conclusion, the judge noted that the software, which is bundled with Intuit's Quicken Suite, customizes the content of more than 100 legal forms based on information supplied by the end user. "Parson's argument to the contrary notwithstanding, QFL is far more than a static form with instructions on how to fill in the blanks," Sanders wrote in his January 22 order. Parsons Technology is the publisher of Quicken Family Lawyer. Once owned by Intuit, the company is now a division of The Learning Company. An Intuit spokeswoman said the company licenses the Quicken name to Parsons. Sanders rejected Parson's arguments that the Texas statute violates Free Speech rights guaranteed under the U.S. and Texan constitutions, holding that the prohibition is content neutral and therefore subject to a more lenient level of scrutiny. Additionally, the ruling applies only to software that already has been published, so there is no prior restraint of speech, the judge contended. Nonetheless, critics of the ruling say it creates an unconstitutional chilling effect on publishers. "It's inconsistent with the First Amendment to prohibit the distribution of information about the legal system as a general matter," said Pete Kennedy, a George & Donaldson attorney representing Nolo Press as it is being investigated for distributing its Living Willmaker software in Texas. "I don't think the remedy of banning publications from Texas is anywhere near narrowly tailored enough to satisfy the very limited power of the government to regulate speech," he said. In addition to Nolo Press, Kennedy said, Texas is probing several other companies that offer similar products. Lawyers for Texas's Unauthorized Practice of the Law Committee and for Parsons could not be reached for comment. Other critics of the ruling said the biggest casualty of the ruling would be the public. "[The ruling] does create a chill and hurts the ability of the public to get needed legal information at a low cost," said Gerry Goldsholle, who heads the legal advice site Free Advice. Still, he added, the effect of the ruling is likely to be narrow. "Good publishers," he explained, "should be able to work around this ruling with cautions" and disclaimers displayed prominently on the product. Copyright ) 1995-99 CNET, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy policy. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For goodness sake yes, we better ban anything that is likely to cut in on the profits made and the control held by lawyers in the USA. I mean, look at how this sorry sight known as the Internet has turned so many things topsy-turvy in society in recent years. It was bad enough back in the 1980's when the Usenet newsgroups were so active, but at least it was only a relative handful of cranks and dissidents and anarchists making speeches. No one much had even heard of them. A fond memory: the early days of this Digest in 1981-83 when the telcos were absolutely aghast that anyone could get on here and print previously heretofore 'secrets' they preferred no public discussion on. Remember, this Digest was around even before divestiture, when AT&T was 'Ma Bell'. Fast forward a few years ... the print media has been quite concerned for awhile now about their gradual loss of control over what people write about and the advertising dollars that go with it. When you don't need the morning newspaper or the talking heads on television news to (as W.R. Hearst once put it) tell you what your opinions and beliefs are any longer then times are getting tough at places like Tribune Media Services. That is why the newspapers and television/ radio stations are so happy to tell Frightened Mothers everywhere about all the child porn on the net. Keep those kids away from the net! What are you trying to do, fix things so in the next generation or so we don't have any readers/television watchers left at all? Maybe we can use the copyrigtht laws to further muddy the waters. Now the relative handful of crackpots has grown to a huge number of citizens and not only are they posting idiotic messages everywhere exposing our corporations and government agencies, they are actually using free audio/video encoders and decoders like those given away by Real Player and Microsoft (Windows Media Player) to put on their own audio/video webcasts to do the same thing. There are actually millions of people watching and listening to them, and to think they did not have to clear it first with our network and its advertisers. Can't the police do something to stop it? Other than accusing them of having seventy-six thousand kiddy porn pictures on their computer and rounding up all the Frightened Mothers of course; that joke got stretched so thin that where netters used to laugh about it now they just ignore it totally ... I mean, that damned Internet has made hassles for the print and broadcast media; it has made it very difficult for government to work in secret; it has made locating and utilizing public records that were previously so obscure as to be useless quite easy; it has given our fine men and women in law enforcement countless headaches and heart- aches as they strive to lock up more and more of our citizens each year; and now, by God, can't someone do something to stop it before it sends America's legal beagles, shysters and mouthpieces to the poorhouse? What has the world come to if a lawyer won't be able to get away with charging two hundred dollars an hour for his 'services' any longer? All of our establishments are seeing major changes in what they can get way with and do in secret as a result of the Internet, because -- as freespeech.com phrases it ... 'the people know better ...' I think we can assume the lawyers and judges will do their best to save us from the tyranny of the internet. Others of our institutions may suffer, but the lawyers will do their best to keep it from happening to them. And don't forget: YOU can now do your own webcasting quite easily with very little hassle, plus a free player and audio encoder to assist you in your effort. Check out http://www.freespeech.org PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 07:10:07 -0800 From: Mel Beckman Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack > I want to use patch panels and 25 pair cable to link our equipment > racks with the TELCO demarc point. At present we just string a CAT5 > cable from the demarc to the piece of equipment in question (~30-40 > feet). Needless to say the under floor gets pretty messy with all the > cables. > So, the question is can I use CAT5 25 pair to link the 2 patch panels > or do I have to use 25 pair individually shielded pairs to avoid cross > talk between the receiving and transmitting pairs? Ivonader, When you ask "can I use CAT5 25-pair to link the 2 patch panels" I'm guessing you actually mean regular 25-pair telco house cable, and not CAT5. Category-5 cable is a specific standard for four-pair wiring generally used in local area network (e.g. Ethernet) applications; it's not a telco wiring standard. I see your situation frequently, and telco installers are running into it much more often as T1's become ubiquitous. The short answer is: no. Spectrum management rules for in-house wiring of T1s usually don't allow more than two T1s in a pair of 25-pair cables. Note that's a _pair_ of 25-pair cables. The send and receive sides of the T1s must be carried in separate 25-pair cables (this is called diverse routing), and the two T1s transported in a 25-pair cable must be positioned physically as far apart as possible. If you try to run three T1s through a pair of 25-pair cable, it may or may not work, you may or may not take errors, and you might experience intermittent failures at any time. It's not worth the risk, in my opinion. You can carry a single T1 in a Cat-5 (four-pair) cable, up to 50 feet or so, as long as the other two pairs are not used and not grounded, or are grounded on only one end. Be sure to mark the cable as a "hi-cap", or high-capacity line, so that nobody decides to use the spare pares in the future. It's usually a mistake to try and go more than 50' in Cat5. Beyond that distance, you should use shielded cable (ground the shield at one end only). The common telco name for two-pair shielded cable (which has two pairs of wires, T1/T, R1/R, each pair shielded individually) is "D-Screen" (some telco people erroneously call this "T-Screen"). This cable is big and thick and hard to work with, but it has the low-loss characteristics necessary to accommodate the low-power T1 signal from a telco demarc. With D-Screen you can run perhaps 400 feet. I'm amazed how many people try to run T1s hundreds, or even thousands, of feet on Cat-5 or house cable. They run a couple of limited tests (e.g., make a single call on an ISDN PRI line), and then sign-off on the installation, thinking it's fine. Later, when a half-dozen calls or so go through the line, or the aggregate amount of data increases, the line takes errors (usually reported by a high CRC count in the CSU). There is no fix other than proper wiring. I've also seen a flaky T1 installation work fine until a second T1 is installed nearby, at which point both lines fail. Telco demarcs are designed to serve user equipment connected within a few feet. The Network Interface Unit that the telco provides strips off the driving current (about 140 volts) that carried the signal to your office. The signal coming out of the NIU can only run a short distance in ordinary Cat5 cable before suffering degradation. The T1 send and receive pairs are on RJ45 pins 1/2 and 4/5, respectively. It turns out that ordinary Cat5 Ethernet patch cable pairs are organized so that RJ45 pins 1/2 and 4/5 are carried on separate pairs without being split, so you can use ordinary Ethernet patch cables to connect your CSU to the demarc over short (5-50') distances. Anything beyond this is considered an "extended demarc" by the telco, and requires following the above rules. The most important step of installing an extended demarc is to stress-test it. On the cheap you can ask the telco to do this by putting a loop up at your CSU and having them run to it. They should run the test for at least ten minutes, using various bit patterns. There should be *zero* errors. Even a few errors is an indication of some kind of noise problem in your extension (assuming test run error-free to the NIU). If you do a lot of T1 work, invest in a TBird or other T1 test generator and measurement set. These are as cheap as $600 now from some vendors. Learn how to use it and you'll save yourself all kinds of headaches. - Mel Beckman ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 07:58:35 -0800 From: xr-dude000@paralynx.com (digger) Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack In article , Lex wrote: > I want to use patch panels and 25 pair cable to link our equipment > racks with the TELCO demarc point. At present we just string a CAT5 > cable from the demarc to the piece of equipment in question (~30-40 > feet). Needless to say the under floor gets pretty messy with all the > cables. > So, the question is can I use CAT5 25 pair to link the 2 patch panels > or do I have to use 25 pair individually shielded pairs to avoid cross > talk between the receiving and transmitting pairs? 25 pr will be fine, Cat 5 isnt really necessary unless there is a lot of noise in the room - radio transmitters, high current devices - pumps or airconditioners. (thats cat 3 25 pr) remove 000 from email address to reply ------------------------------ From: Stewart Irwin Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 07:50:35 -0500 Organization: Interpath Communications Inc. Yes you can use it for the most part, but you will have problems down the road. You should use a cable that is rated for T1. We are using LUCENT-D 613C 30/22 cable between our patch panel and the frame. tel;pager:1-800-331-7242 pin#516717 tel;cell:(919)630-3980 tel;fax:(919)856-2055 tel;home:(919)556-2178 tel;work:(919)856-2086 x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:stewart.irwin@interpath.net x-mozilla-cpt:;0 fn:Stewart W. Irwin end:vcard ------------------------------ From: Matthew E. Pearson Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 01:32:18 -0500 Organization: The Internet Access Company Should be just fine, thats how telco's usually put in their blocks around here. Matthew E. Pearson email: mpearson@tiac.net Sr. Network Engineer tel: (781) 932-2000 The Internet Access Company ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: New Telecom Chat Room Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 20:00:00 CDT Be sure to check out the new chat room specifically for telecom topics which is part of the Telecom Archives. It seems to function much better than the older version which was available, and it functions like an IRC-style chat. http://telecom-digest.org/chatroom.html PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #7 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 5 19:51:03 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA29655; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 19:51:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 19:51:03 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902060051.TAA29655@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #8 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Feb 99 19:51:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 8 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Local Residential Competition Comes To Canada (Joey Lindstrom) UCLA Short Course: New Third Generation Cellular Digital PCS (B Goodin) Go Network Mulls Security Issue (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "HTML: The Definitive Guide", C Musciano/B Kennedy (R Slade) Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly (Steven J. Sobol) Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly (Al Varney) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Steve Pinkston) Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (digger) Re: The Web's Identity Crisis (Billy Harvey) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-727-5427 Fax: 847-675-3140 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 10:32:21 -0700 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Local Residential Competition Comes To Canada The following article appeared in the Calgary Sun newspaper on Friday, February 5th 1999. It's probably also available somewhere on their website: http://www.canoe.ca Note the bits about LNP and no charges involved in switching. PHONE OPTIONS RING IN Sprint Hopes To Win Telus Customers By Wanda Ehlers Calgary Sun Calgary's phone market got a whole lot busier yesterday as Sprint Canada Inc. announced it will take on Telus in the local phone business. Calgary will be the first Canadian city to be offered alternative local telephone services for both business and residential customers, Sprint's parent firm said yesterday. Starting today, Call-Net Enterprises will begin an advertising and telemarketing blitz in an attempt to court Calgarians into switching service providers. Sprint's basic local service inside Calgary will be $22.61 per month and rise to as high as $30.61 in outlying regions. Those who buy local service and either internet or long distance from Sprint will get a $2 discount off the basic rate. The newly-merged BCT.Telus charges virtually identical rates in Alberta for basic service. But both providers say the real advantage will be in getting more bang for your buck with services like calling features, long distance and internet access. "For the first time in the 120-year history of telephone service in this country, there is now real local competition for business and residential customers," said Call-Net chief executive Juri Koor. AT&T Canada also weighed (sic) into the fray, quietly announcing plans to provide local service for business customers in up to seven major urban markets this year. Calling Calgary a strong market that's open and accepting to competition, Sprint Canada president Philip Bates said Cowtown was an obvious market to launch into the $8.5 billion local phone wars. The switch will be virtually seamless, Bates said, with no special equipment or charges involved in moving to the new provider. Customers will also be able to keep their existing phone numbers. Along with Calgarians, residents of Airdrie, Cochrane, Okotoks, and High River will have the option to choose Sprint Canada as their new local provider. Within three years, Sprint expects to be in 25 major Canadian markets, including Edmonton. The company will use its existing long-distance customer base of 1.3 million as a launching pad for local service and will be in a position to reach out to six or seven million households by the time the rollout is complete. Telus welcomed the competition, adding it's been ready to take on all comers since deregulation in 1994. "Last year, we actually increased our (long distance) market share," said spokesman Jeff Welke. -files from Sun News Services / From Joey Lindstrom Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU, joey@lindstrom.com / Visit The NuServer! http://www.GaryNumanFan.NU / Visit The Webb! http://webb.GaryNumanFan.NU / "640K ought to be enough for anybody." - Bill Gates, 1981 ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course: New Third Generation Cellular Digital PCS Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 09:54:19 -0800 On May 3-6, 1999, UCLA Extension will present the short course, New Third Generation Cellular, Digital PCS, and Broadband Mobile Data - What Will Dominate?", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are C. R. "Rick" Baugh, PhD, consultant, and Peter Rysavy, MSEE, consultant. The establishment of standards for several different third-generation cellular systems is underway, with completion scheduled for late 2000 and deployment shortly thereafter. While each of the alternative technologies has established its architectural foundation, third generation standards emphasize better voice quality, a wider range of services, and higher performing data capabilities than the deployed services. At the same time, current second generation cellular and PCS technologies are rapidly upgrading their enhanced services and high performance data capabilities to incorporate many third generation capabilities. Developers are now asking the question: will the second-generation cellular and PCS technologies evolve to match the new third generation cellular capabilities, or will the new third generation cellular prevail in the end? Concurrently over the last 5 years, the FCC has released over 3 GHz of spectrum for wireless services, by any measure an enormous amount. Furthermore, license holders have virtually no restrictions on what services they provide in this spectrum, setting the stage for a wide range of new wireless services, including broadband mobile data. Multiple wireless service providers will offer competing services, including a range of broadband mobile data capabilities. This raises yet another question: Will cellular be the broadband data service of choice, or will services other than cellular dominate this market? While on the surface many of the services may look similar, there are subtle but profound differences. It is critical to understand these differences and their impact on competition, service offerings, system performance, and customer acceptance. These differences occur in: Wireless coverage; Service capacity; Ease of deployment; Mobility and roaming; Security and privacy; Network interoperability protocols; Compatibility with legacy systems; Data rates and data response times; Architectural approaches for Internet access; Voice quality; Multimedia capacity; Standards-cellular, PCS, wireless data; Costs-deployment and usage; and Susceptibility to interference. Wireless connectivity and access is important, but this is only a partial answer for end-to-end solutions and applications. Integration and interoperability with legacy systems and traditional public voice and data networks is the key for successful businesses. This course should help service providers enhance and expand on their own choice of technologies as well as understand the differences between competing technologies. Users who attend the course should come to understand the distinctions among alternatives when qualifying service providers to meet their business needs and application requirements. And finally, manufacturers of equipment should benefit from the course in understanding the technical trade-offs between alternative technology characteristics and their associated impact on system performance. UCLA Extension has presented this highly successful short course since 1992. The course fee is $1395, which includes extensive course materials. These materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 02:46:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Go Network Mulls Security Issue http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,31981,00.html By Sandeep Junnarkar Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 4, 1999, 5:20 p.m. PT Update: Disney's recently launched Go Network is charging ahead with a direct-email campaign aimed at drawing traffic from the media giant's affiliated sites. But in its effort to help users make a smooth transition from the affiliate sites, Disney included user names and passwords in the email messages, raising concern about the network's security. "Although I was told I would not get unsolicited mail, I got this email with my user name and password in a completely unsecure way," said Sanjay Mathur, a regular user of ESPN.com, one of Disney's online properties, along with ABCNews.go.com and Family.go.com. "What bothers me is that someone could possibly use that information to get my credit card information," Mathur added. "I do whatever I can to maintain security, and here is someone just piping it over the Internet." But the Go Network quickly noted that it is more of a customer satisfaction issue than a security problem, adding that there is no way to retrieve credit card information from their sites either over the Internet or by email. "The broadcast email that was sent to ESPN subscribers to inform them of their benefits on GO Network did not compromise the users' credit card information in any way," said Patrick Naughton, executive vice president of products at the Go Network. Even if credit card security is not vulnerable in the email messages, Disney could lose precious credibility and members simply because of the perception of risk. As hacks, free email breaches, and other security issues make regular headlines, those who are newer to the Net often are unsure where they are safe. And with entertainment, portal, and other companies locked in intense competition for members, there are plenty of choices for users looking to make a switch. No company knows that more than the image-conscious Disney. "If we find that many users feel more comfortable specifically requesting their password information be mailed to them, we'll adjust the content of our email messages to not contain this convenient information up front," Naughton said. The company said it had not yet received any complaints about the campaign but that it would look into the security issues involved. An ESPN.com spokesman said a call from a CNET News.com reporter was the first time he had heard that the direct email effort has raised concern. "I think it is a good call-out that it could be a security issue," said Barak Berkowitz, Go Network's senior vice president of worldwide marketing. "We are checking to make sure, but everyone believes you would not be able to get any credit card data with that user ID and password." The Go Network said several different emails have been sent out recently to users. Among them, one deals with parental notification when someone under 13 joins, while another is a confirmation email that a new subscriber receives when he or she registers for the service. Both contain user names and passwords, ESPN.com and Go confirmed. The Go Network pointed out, however, that only the last four digits of a credit card are listed in the account information. The letter that people like Mathur received was to inform members of new services available at the Go Network, which now has about nine million members. "What we are going to do is right now is a fairly quick security review," Berkowitz said. "If there is no clear benefit to keeping the password there, we should definitely get rid of it." Meanwhile, Mathur is not quite appeased. Although he sent a complaint to ESPN, he is still waiting for a response. "I actually am thinking about ending my membership," he said. "I don't want to reward them for that kind of behavior. And I can get enough [sports news] for free on their site anyway." Copyright 1995-99 CNET, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy policy. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:12:41 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "HTML: The Definitive Guide", Musciano/Kennedy Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKHTMLDG.RVW 981115 "HTML: The Definitive Guide", Chuck Musciano/Bill Kennedy, 1998, 1-56592-492-4, U$32.95/C$46.95 %A Chuck Musciano cmusciano@aol.com %A Bill Kennedy bkennedy@activmedia.com %C 103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA 95472 %D 1998 %G 1-56592-492-4 %I O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. %O U$32.95/C$46.95 800-998-9938 fax: 707-829-0104 nuts@ora.com %P 608 p. %T "HTML: The Definitive Guide", 3rd edition If you are serious about designing documents and Web pages with HTML (HyperText Markup Language) then you *must* have this book. First of all, it *is* definitive. Many books, though much longer, don't begin to match the depth of this current work. Musciano and Kennedy cover the standard HTML up to 4.0, and, more importantly, include the non-standard extensions of Netscape and Internet Explorer. The basics, text, rules, multimedia, links, lists, forms, tables, frames and more are all thoroughly covered, point by point and attribute by attribute. There is even the SGML (Standard Generalized Markup Language) DTD (Document Type Definition) for HTML 4.0. (This must be definitive: it's the definition of the language.) Second, it *is* a guide, and a very good one. Lemay's "Web Publishing With HTML" (cf. BKWPHTML.RVW) still holds an edge as the most approachable beginner's introduction to Web page creation, but Musciano and Kennedy can easily welcome the newcomer as well. The structure is logical and the explanations are crystal clear. In spite of all this, the book contains even more. Web design is not given a separate section, but seamlessly permeates every section of the book. Readers are constantly reminded that while extensions may be fun, not everyone in the world has the same browser. Alternative methods are suggested for non-standard effects and functions. Shortcuts, suitable to only one browser or server, are recommended against in order to ensure the utmost compatibility with all systems. The authors no longer have coverage of CGI (Common Gateway Interface) programming, but they do explain the use of email to collect form data, which is much more useful for maintainers of small Web sites without access to extensive server functions. All this, and readable, too. The content is straightforward and lucid. While you might not read this book for laughs, it is not the tome to choose to put yourself to sleep at night, either. I can recommend this book, without reservation, to anyone who wants to learn HTML programming and use. It is, still, the definitive guide and the only one I find I need to keep on my shelf. (The fact that my review has been misquoted on the back cover of the last two editions of this book has had no influence at all on this review.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996, 1997, 1998 BKHTMLDG.RVW 981115 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: sjsobol@nstc.com (Steven J. Sobol) Subject: Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: 4 Feb 1999 00:59:35 GMT Organization: North Shore Technologies Corp. 888.480.INET Rumor has it that nospam.tonypo@nospam.ultranet.com said > Gaaacckk! $9.50 for CLID/N? It's $4.95 here and I thought Bell Atlantic > was gouging us. I don't think it costs that much in Ohio, though I pay for it as part of a package, so the cost of CID alone isn't broken out on my phone bill. Steven J. Sobol - President, North Shore Technologies Corporation Founding Member & System Admin, The Forum for Responsible & Ethical E-mail www.nstc.com * sjsobol@nstc.com [<>] www.spamfree.org * sjsobol@spamfree.org I offer my services free of charge to people running Sendmail who have open relays and need to close them. E-mail me, or call 888.480.INET (4638) ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp2.ih.lucent.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Ameritech's Call-Blocking Service Too Costly, Trade Group Says Date: 5 Feb 1999 00:22:09 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Naperville, IL Reply-To: varney@lucent.com In article , Ed Ellers wrote: > Tad Cook quoted from an Indianapolis Star story: >> "Beginning today, Ameritech will roll out its new Privacy Manager >> service in three Indiana cities -- Indianapolis, Gary and >> Hammond. While the service costs $3.95 a month, it requires Caller >> ID with Name to work, which costs an extra $9.50 a month. >> "That's too much, says a telemarketing group, arguing that consumers >> can get pretty much the same result by being firm with telemarketers >> and asking to be removed from calling lists." > I have to agree here -- if Privacy Manager presents a voice message to > the called party, there's no reason to require Caller ID (with name or > not) because the Caller ID display unit doesn't enter into the > operation! Privacy Manager presents a voice message to UNIDENTIFIED calling parties, and then (assuming the caller persists) to the called party. Calling Name is used to: 1) show the name/number of most callers or 2) display the fact that the call has been intercepted by CALL MANAGER. I.e., "CALL MANAGER" appears in the calling name display. I think Ameritech was assuming most folks that wanted Privacy Manager ALSO wanted to know who was calling (on all calls, not just those handled by Privacy Manager). Without Calling Name, called party wouldn't know the identity of any IDENTIFIED caller. Is that useful by itself? Alternatively, they could "privacy manage" every incoming call, but that would cost more (more such calls per month) and annoy the mother-in-law. Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ From: Steve Pinkston Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack Date: 5 Feb 1999 16:14:50 GMT Organization: ADC Kentrox I've been following this discussion of T1 customer premises wiring for some time now, and watching the various responses. With the explosion of T1 deployments in recent years, a lot of people have done installations and their field experiences -- varied as they are -- are evident in the responses. My perspective is a little different. I work in the technical support department of a company that makes T1 CSUs and DSUs. I have spoken to thousands of field installers over the years and have seen just about everything that can go wrong in a T1 installation. I'll try to give you some bottom-line facts and observations. Most of Mel Beckman's observations are quite accurate. If you can only carry one type of cable to use for connecting CPE to CSU and CSU to NIU, use INDIVIDUALLY-SHIELDED TWISTED- PAIR cable. The drain wires of the shields should be grounded at one end only. Cat5 does not qualify because it is not shielded. So, why can you get away with using Cat5 a lot of the time? The unknown variable in the wiring equation is signal level. If two unshielded pairs are in close physical proximity to each other, and the signal levels are significantly different, crosstalk -- that is, the inductive coupling of the stronger signal into the weaker signal -- can occur. In our tests, we have shown that a signal differential of 7.5 dB or greater can cause crosstalk. In T1 applications, this results in BiPolar Violations (BPVs), which will also show up as CRC-6 errors in ESF receivers. The connection from the CPE to the CSU is not usually a problem, since this is limited to 655 feet; there is not enough loss over that distance to cause a crosstalk problem. Cat5 will not usually cause a problem. If the NIU regenerates the inbound signal -- this happens with devices like an HDSL unit, colocated M13 mux or 1/0 DCS -- then you could also use Cat5, unless you are going to extend the demarc a great enough distance that the received signal level at the CSU is -7.5 dBdsx0 or lower. The installations that are toughest are the ones that terminate in a true NIU or "smartjack." Although most NIUs can be optioned to regenerate the T1 signal toward the CPE, this is almost never done, and is often explicitly prohibited by the telco. In an installation like this, the received signal can be as low as -16.0 dBdsx0. If you connect the CSU to the NIU with Cat5 in this situation, you are almost guaranteed to have a BPV problem, and I have seen it happen in as little as 6 feet. To make matters worse, the telco often directs on-site personnel to help them check the line by putting a "hard loop" on the line -- that is, shorting the transmit pair to the receive pair. The passive RJ48X jacks often installed at the end of an extended demarc are usually set up to do this automatically if the RJ48 plug is withdrawn. And -- surprise! -- the line tests GOOD, even though the CSU takes massive BPVs when connected. This happens for two reasons. The most important is that putting the short at the end of the line equalizes the transmit and receive levels. The very mechanism of crosstalk is eliminated temporarily because there is no active driver at the end. The second reason is that the same line state exists on both sides of the the line at the same moment. Ones don't interfere with ones, and zeroes don't interfere with zeroes. I hope I have been clear in this article. If proper cabling were used on all T1 installations, my co-workers and I would take a lot fewer calls, and customers would get their networks into service a lot sooner. A few minor quibbles with Mel Beckman's excellent post: Mel Beckman wrote in article ... > You can carry a single T1 in a Cat-5 (four-pair) cable, up to 50 feet > or so, as long as the other two pairs are not used and not grounded, > or are grounded on only one end. Crosstalk can and does occur in Cat5 runs of 50 feet and less. It all hinges on the signal level. > With D-Screen you can run perhaps 400 feet. Again, signal level is everything. If the telco NIU is a regenerator, like an HDSL CPE unit, you might be able to go 2000 feet or more, depending on the receiver input sensitivity of the CSU. > The Network Interface Unit that the telco provides strips > off the driving current (about 140 volts) that carried the signal to > your office. The current you speak of is the simplex current, which has nothing to do with the T1 signal directly, but is used to power the repeaters in the line, and sometimes the NIU, as well. It used to also be used to power the CSU, but that is rare these days. Steve Pinkston ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 10:31:01 -0800 From: xr-dude000@paralynx.com (digger) Subject: Re: T1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack We've been running 3 t1's on the same cable for more than a year now, with no errors. It comes in on a 100pr 10year (or more) old entrance cable, with payphones, ordinary 1b lines running fax and modem etc. We use seperate 4pr cat5 cables running from the telco demarc to the switch (mitel sx-2000l) because there are also many 100mb ethernet hubs and routers in the same room, but it's been running the campus without a hitch so far - knock wood. Marty cableguy@twu.ca remove 000 from email address to reply ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 18:00:58 -0500 Subject: Re: The Web's Identity Crisis From: Billy Harvey Dr. Joel M. Hoffman writes: > More to the point, you'll need software to transmit the information in > the hardware. How hard will it be for me to spoof that information? > I don't see the point. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the catch is, the 'average' > user on the internet these days would not know how to spoof the > information. You would, I probably could do it, and many readers > here would figure it out. Pat, What you missed here is that if anyone can do it then everyone can do it. The software would hit the web and be available worldwide before the chip itself was. So what would be the recourse - the typical response by "concerned legislators" would be to make it illegal to have your computer put out false information, even if the individual is trying to protect his privacy. If it *can* be abused, it *will* be abused in the pursuit of profit. There are so many instances of commercial interest taking precedence over privacy that the fight to retain it is probably already well lost. Billy ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #8 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 9 14:16:06 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA22530; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 14:16:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 14:16:06 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902091916.OAA22530@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #9 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Feb 99 14:16:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 9 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson It's No Time to Dial 9-1-1 (Monty Solomon) Public Service Commission May Alter Sarasota FL Area Code (Tad Cook) Telecom Update (Canada) #169, February 8, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) Telecom Operations Testing (Michael Young) Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell (Louis Raphael) Switchmode Power Supplies - Consultants (mmcintyr@swichtec.co.nz) History of Telco Mergers? (Erik Rauch) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 14:13:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: It's No Time to Dial 9-1-1 By Ronald Rosenberg It's open season on Bell Atlantic Corp. For years after the Baby Bells were spun off from AT&T Corp. in 1984, Bell Atlantic lumbered along, wielding its monopoly power over local phone service. A whiff of competition began after passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which called for the Bell companies to open their local markets to rivals. Now, New York-based Bell Atlantic is under assault on seemingly all fronts - ranging from local calling and long-distance service to wireless communications and Internet access. In Massachusetts alone, Bell Atlantic faces 87 rivals. Four years ago, Nynex Corp., the former New England phone company that Bell Atlantic acquired in 1997, had just four competitors. ''This is a real transition year for Bell Atlantic,'' said Fred Voit, an analyst at The Yankee Group, the Boston market research and consulting firm. ''They're losing business customers to competitors, face some significant rivals for the first time in the residential market, and they need to get into long-distance services.'' Bell Atlantic's chief executive, 52-year-old Ivan G. Seidenberg, who joined the company in New York out of high school and rose from a cable splicer's assistant, maintains that the nation's largest regional phone carrier is prepared for the competitive assault arising from regulatory and technological changes sweeping the industry. ''We are seeing the telecommunications industry transition itself away from large regional players to a handful of stronger global players, and we want to be one of them,'' said Seidenberg, in a recent interview. Indeed, the company is taking significant steps to transform itself beyond a humdrum provider of local phone service in 13 East Coast states. Its immediate goal is to expand into long-distance service, initially in New York State. Like other Baby Bells, it is barred by the 1996 telecom act from entering the long-distance market until it proves to regulators it has opened up its local market. Meanwhile, Bell Atlantic also faces hurdles in gaining regulatory approval for its $52.9 billion proposed acquisition of GTE Corp., which would help give it a nationwide presence in local, long-distance, and wireless communications plus a wholesale Internet business. Still, rivals are closing in from many directions. Long-distance providers, most notably AT&T, are pressing to get into local calling. Cable television service providers, which have started to offer phone service over cable wires, represent a huge new threat to the Baby Bells. Increasing numbers of wireless carriers, both national and regional, are going after Bell Atlantic's customers. New independent carriers are offering high-speed Internet access. Just last week, several competitors announced initiatives that turned up the heat on Bell Atlantic. Suddenly Bell Atlantic's customers have more choices than ever before, which promises to bring lower prices and improved service. With all-out competition materializing this year, Bell Atlantic finds itself slugging it out on numerous battlefields: Local calling: Starting April 20, some residential Bell Atlantic customers in Massachusetts will begin to see competition for toll calls. Callers who dial 1+ any of the four Greater Boston area codes (617, 508, 978, and 781) will be able to choose an alternative - such as AT&T and MCI WorldCom - the way they pick a long-distance provider now. In some Boston suburbs, Bell Atlantic already faces another competitor: MediaOne Group, the state's largest cable TV service provider, whose coaxial cables can provide digital local phone service. Targeting consumers who make many local calls, MediaOne offers a flat-rate service in 27 Mass. communities for $26.95 per month. Just last week MediaOne obtained Time Warner's Bay State cable system in a swap that will give MediaOne over one million customers - 59 percent of the state's cable TV market - who are all potential local telephone customers. MediaOne is not alone. Also last week, AT&T, in a bold effort to challenge the Baby Bells in providing local residential phone service, cut a deal to offer phone service over Time Warner's cable lines in much of the country. That venture came on top of ATT's pending purchase of Tele-Communications Inc., the nation's number two cable television provider. AT&T already provides large businesses in New York and Boston with local telephone service through its subsidiary, Teleport Communications Group. Other Bell companies are looking to lock horns with Bell Atlantic on local service. SBC Communications, San Antonio-based Bell company, said last week it plans to enter the Boston market late this year or early next, initially for business customers. It would mark the first time a Baby Bell is invading the territory of another Bell company for local or long-distance services. In yet another assault on Bell Atlantic's local calling market, MCI WorldCom last week began offering residential service in New York State, at a 5 percent discount to Bell Atlantic rates or in flat-rate monthly packages. MCI WorldCom, the nation's second-largest long distance company, is leasing lines from Bell Atlantic. Long distance: With long distance considered the brass ring for nearly all regional Bell companies, Bell Atlantic's primary objective this year is to offer long-distance service in New York State - the single largest source in the United States for domestic and international calls. But it faces high hurdles in proving to federal and state regulators that it can meet the telecom act's requirement of freeing up local markets before being allowed to enter long distance. Bell Atlantic expects to complete federal and state requirements by the end of this month and clear all hurdles by the summer or early fall, according to Seidenberg. Already several other regional Bells, such as Ameritech, have tried and failed to gain regulatory approval to offer long-distance service. But many analysts maintain Bell Atlantic could become the first long-distance Bell company. ''I still have a rosy expectation of how it will all come out,'' said Seidenberg. He bristles at the more than 600 pages of requirements needed to prove that Bell Atlantic has the technology to switch customers who may want an alternative local phone carrier. ''In the last few years, we have not been permitted to have the kind of growth strategies that our competitors have because of government policies,'' he added, calling the requirements an ''anachronism.'' Massachusetts and Pennsylvania would follow New York as the next states where Bell Atlantic plans to offer long distance. The company says it seeks to apply in both states by year-end. Wireless: Although Bell Atlantic's overall revenue last year grew only 3 percent to $31.6 billion, its wireless business soared 25 percent. That success came despite competition from five wireless competitors in Greater Boston alone. Still, Bell Atlantic saw customer erosion as AT&T and Sprint PCS offered single-rate calling plans to business and residential customers that eliminated separate long-distance and roaming charges. Bell Atlantic responded with a similar plan last year. And while the pending merger with GTE will significantly expand its wireless operations to as far as California, Bell Atlantic was unsuccessful in its bid to acquire AirTouch Communications Corp., the nation's largest independent cellular telephone company. Bell Atlantic was outbid by Vodaphone Group PLC of Great Britain. The combination of GTE and AirTouch would have given Bell Atlantic wireless coverage in 44 states and enabled it to better compete against AT&T Wireless and Sprint PCS, which have coast-to-coast networks. Seidenberg said the loss of AirTouch was a ''missed opportunity, but not a critical loss,'' adding that the Bell Atlantic-GTE combination creates a large national wireless company nonetheless. Internet access: Later this month, Bell Atlantic plans to begin competing against MediaOne, RCN Corp., and other area cable TV service providers with Infospeed, a high-speed Internet service that uses the ubiquitous telephone wire. The new service, which will cost up to $99.95 per month compared to $50 per month or less for cable modem service, is expected to appeal to residential customers in Boston and communities not served by MediaOne or RCN. Some small- and medium-sized businesses are turning to other companies that offer the same high-speed Internet service over phone lines. These Internet service providers, such as Northpoint Communications Inc., say they can undercut Bell Atlantic's prices for high-speed telephone lines leased by businesses for Internet access. But some analysts believe it's the cable companies that have the upper hand in assembling a bundle of services that include Internet access, TV, and local dialing. But don't count the Baby Bells out. William P. Bane, a telecommunications analyst at Mercer Management Consulting, said Bell Atlantic is better positioned than the other Bells for the competitive new era. ''For Bell Atlantic this is the Olympics, where the best of the best are in the stadium,'' Bane said. ------------------------------ Subject: Public Service Commission May Alter Sarasota FL Area Code Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 00:30:05 -PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) By Phil Levine, The Bradenton Herald, Fla. Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Feb. 6--SARASOTA, Fla.--In the regional battle over proposed changes to the 941 area code, all's quiet on the northern front. However, at a Public Service Commission hearing held Friday at Sarasota City Hall, battle lines were being drawn along the southern vanguard of Sarasota County. The proposal under consideration at the hearing would maintain the 941 exchange in Manatee, Sarasota and Polk counties. However, the proposed split would mean that residents of Englewood -- a town divided between Sarasota and Charlotte counties -- will be faced with two local area codes; and the rest of Charlotte and seven other counties would have a new area code. In an interview after the hearing, commission representative Ann Shelfer confirmed that the "permissive" first phase of splitting the current 941 area code will begin next month. This phase would allow callers in the affected region to use either 941 or the new, as yet unnamed area code. The mandatory final change is scheduled for September. The last change to the region's area code occurred in 1995, when 941 was introduced to Manatee, Sarasota and 11 other counties stretching south to Monroe County. At the time, officials didn't foresee a need to make further changes before the year 2012. However, growth in the use of cellular phones, pagers and other telecommunications devices has changed that timetable. During Friday's hearing, which drew about 25 people, few Manatee County voices were heard. One of the voices in attendance belonged to Roger Hill. As ranch manager at the Schroeder-Manatee Ranch -- home to the massive Lakewood Ranch development in East Manatee County -- Hill expressed satisfaction with the plan's intention to retain the 941 area code for both counties. However, vocal opposition from Englewood residents at the hearing caused Hill some concern. "I assume from the small Manatee turnout today that most people are confident the plan will succeed," he said. "I only hope their confidence is justified. As of now, it's in the hands of bureaucrats." Manatee Chamber of Commerce representative Rick Brown echoed Hill's appreciation of the plan and "reiterated our support for maintaining the area code in Manatee and Sarasota counties." Business owners and residents of Englewood were less than laudatory in their review of the plan. Linda Pierce, executive director of Englewood's Chamber of Commerce, adamantly opposed the plan. "On behalf of the 600 businesses our chamber represents," she said, "I implore you to reconsider the decision to split our area into two codes." Several other Englewood residents echoed those sentiments. Charlotte County business owner Lynn Flatt warned Public Service Commission members that the proposed split would have "an extreme effect" on area businesses. Speaking on behalf the commission, attorney Julie McKinney said those concerns would be expressed to commission board members and they would be addressed "if it's possible to do so." The commission, which has regulatory oversight, is sponsoring a series of public hearings before deciding on a final plan of action. To comment on the area code proposal, contact the Public Service Commission at 1-850-413-6236, send a fax to 1-850-413-6250, or write to 2540 Shumard Oak Blvd., Tallahassee, Fla. 32399. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 11:06:58 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #169, February 8, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 169: February 8, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Sprint Launches Local Service in Calgary ** MetroNet Buys Starcom's Fiber ** Bell and Shaw Protest Exclusion From Developer's Trenches ** Internet Providers Slam Bell Offer ** U.S. Carrier Plans Fiber Through Canada ** Strike Looms at Bell Canada ** LNP Extended to Additional Cities ** SaskTel Allies With Netscape ** AlphaNet Goes Bankrupt ** Review of Policy Freezing Contribution Rates ** Excel Enters Canadian LD Market ** Cantel Cuts Overseas Rates ** BCI Raises $350 Million ** New Name for Tele-Direct ** MT&T Invests in Automated Customer Service ** NS Power Allies With Williams ** Bell, Cenosis Extend Digital Transport Test ** AT&T Canada Registers as CLEC ** AT&T (U.S.) Allies With Time Warner ** Paytel Signs Equess for Payphone LD ** Financial Reports Telus Rogers Cantel MTS MT&T Island Telecom ** How Are Telecom Carriers Coping With Y2K? ============================================================ SPRINT LAUNCHES LOCAL SERVICE IN CALGARY: On February 4, Sprint Canada launched local telephone service to residential and business customers in Calgary and said it will expand to Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal later this year. Business rates are 14% below Telus. Residential customers who also use Sprint's Internet or LD services will save 10% on local rates. ** Blowing our own horn: Two months ago, Telecom Update #161 reported that Sprint would offer local service in Calgary in February. METRONET BUYS STARCOM'S FIBER: MetroNet Communications has purchased 48 fiber optic strands between Vancouver and Seattle, and related electronics, for $24 Million. The fiber was owned by Starcom Service Corp, now in receivership. MetroNet has hired key Starcom technical employees. ** As part of the deal, MetroNet sold 20-year indefeasible rights of use to PSINet (20 strands), Teleglobe (2), and BC Telecom (2). BELL AND SHAW PROTEST EXCLUSION FROM DEVELOPER'S TRENCHES: Metrus Properties has told Bell Canada and Shaw Cablesystems that Futureway Communications, a recent CLEC registrant, will have exclusive access to common utility trenches in a new subdivision in Richmond Hill, Ontario. Bell and Shaw have asked the CRTC to intervene. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1999/8690/b2-01.htm INTERNET PROVIDERS SLAM BELL OFFER: The Canadian Association of Internet Providers says Bell Nexxia has made a proposal to resolve the dispute over ADSL Internet access. CAIP President Ron Kawchuk said the plan, which would reduce the cost to ISPs from $200 to $35 per customer per month, is overpriced and dependent on a technology which doesn't yet exist. U.S. CARRIER PLANS FIBER THROUGH CANADA: Level 3 Communications, a U.S. carrier which is building a network based on Internet Protocol technology, plans to install fiber from Albany to Buffalo via Montreal. Level 3 says this will provide diverse routing for its U.S. network and "allow Level 3's future entry into the Canadian market." ** Worldwide Fiber Inc, which is building Level 3's Montreal-Buffalo route, recently completed an undersea fiber link between Vancouver and Seattle. STRIKE LOOMS AT BELL CANADA: Bell Canada's operators and technicians could be on strike by the end of February. Conciliation talks between Bell and the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union broke down on February 4. LNP EXTENDED TO ADDITIONAL CITIES: On February 1, Local Number Portability in Calgary expanded to include the Airdrie, Cochrane, High River, and Okotoks exchanges. LNP is also now available in Winnipeg and Quebec City, and will be activated in Richmond, BC, on March 1. SASKTEL ALLIES WITH NETSCAPE: SaskTel has signed a three- year agreement with Netscape Communications, giving it access to Netscape's enterprise software and help in offering e-commerce and Internet applications. ALPHANET GOES BANKRUPT: Toronto-based AlphaNet Telecom Inc. has filed an assignment in bankruptcy. The company has sold its hospitality business unit, but was unable to obtain financing or a buyer for its overseas long distance business. AlphaNet's directors have resigned and PricewaterhouseCoopers has been appointed Trustee. REVIEW OF POLICY FREEZING CONTRIBUTION RATES: CRTC Public Notice 99-5 seeks comment on whether contribution revenues, driven by expansion in long distance traffic, have grown faster than could have been expected in early 1998 when fees were frozen, and if so what remedies are appropriate. To participate, notify the Commission by March 12. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-05.htm EXCEL ENTERS CANADIAN LD MARKET: Excel Canada says it will launch residential LD service across the country on March 1, and may introduce Internet service and small business LD by year end. The multi-level marketing company, a subsidiary of Teleglobe, begins recruitment of independent representatives and customers today. CANTEL CUTS OVERSEAS RATES: Rogers Cantel has reduced overseas rates of its standard calling plans and established overseas rates for its prepaid plan. Sample postpaid/prepaid rates: UK 23 cents/75 cents; France 40 cents/75 cents; Japan 63 cents/$1. ** Cantel has added Amway and 7-Eleven stores to its distribution channels. BCI RAISES $350 MILLION: Nortel Networks will invest $150 Million in Bell Canada International convertible bonds in a deal that includes "equipment sales opportunities." In a related agreement, BCI will raise $200 Million from a separate bond issue. NEW NAME FOR TELE-DIRECT: Bell Canada's directory publishing arm, Tele-Direct, has been renamed Bell ActiMedia. MT&T INVESTS IN AUTOMATED CUSTOMER SERVICE: MT&T has taken a stake in Neuromedia, a California-based maker of "Virtual Service Representatives" that answer customer queries by text and pictures delivered via the Web. NS POWER ALLIES WITH WILLIAMS: Nova Scotia Power and Tulsa- based energy/telecom giant Williams have agreed to share information and "explore potential joint energy and telecommunications opportunities." BELL, CENOSIS EXTEND DIGITAL TRANSPORT TEST: Bell Canada and Montreal-based Cenosis Inc. are expanding their trial of a new digital data transport service for the graphics arts industry to 24 sites from four. The service uses a central server to facilitate exchange of very large files. AT&T CANADA REGISTERS AS CLEC: AT&T Canada has filed with the CRTC to become a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier and says it will offer business local service in up to seven urban centers later this year. AT&T (U.S.) ALLIES WITH TIME WARNER: AT&T Corp. is forming a joint venture with Time Warner to supply local phone service over Time Warner's cable systems in 33 states. AT&T aims to offer local service within five years to 40% of U.S. households through cable company facilities. PAYTEL SIGNS EQUESS FOR PAYPHONE LD: Paytel Canada, which hopes to install 10,000 competitive payphones this year, has signed Calgary-based Equess Communications to provide long distance. FINANCIAL REPORTS: The following results are for the fourth quarter: ** Telus reports profits of $59.5 Million, up from $35 Million last year. Revenue increased 1% to $696 Million; long distance revenue fell 11%. ** Rogers Cantel's net loss was $33 Million. Revenue was $324 Million, down 6% on the year but up 3% on the quarter. Rogers Communications' overall loss (excluding one-time items) was $55 Million, unchanged from last year. ** MTS recorded net income of $24 Million, up 13% from last year. Revenue was $163 Million, a 3% increase. ** MT&T's net income was $17 Million, up from $9.1 Million last year. Revenue increased 7% to $185 Million. ** Island Telecom reports net earnings of $2.8 Million, a 65% increase over last year. Revenue grew 2%. HOW ARE TELECOM CARRIERS COPING WITH Y2K? In the February issue of Telemanagement, representatives of four major telecom carriers weigh the hazard to their networks posed by the millennium bug and explain what they've done to cope with it. ** In the same issue, Henry Dortmans explains how telecom managers can go beyond "fire fighting" and draw up an action list for planned telecom improvements. ** To subscribe to Telemanagement, call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225, or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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: Michael Young Subject: Telecom Operations Testing Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 14:31:01 -0500 Organization: Bell Canada / Bell Nexxia I'm part of a group in Bell Canada's IS/IT department that tests the methods and procedures for the operational processes around a service. For a telco that's the business offices, sales channels, phone centres, repair desks (first level, and subsequent test desks), network maintenance, billing, customer enabling, and any links to third party maintenance. The service has usually gone through technical and/or field trial, with a limited group of user, but these processes are handled internally at that stage by the development team. However, before a full scale launch to REAL customers, it's imperative to ensure that all groups have documented,tested procedures to follow. This usually involves what we call an Operational Readiness Test -we select test users, and key people in each operational area, and run actual orders, troubles, and billing records through the system - end to end. This is done for almost all our projects (depending on size) and is clearly seen as a benefit both from the marketing group - looking for a smooth introduction with satisfied customers, and by the actual line groups - looking for a product they can easily support. I'm curious how involved other telcos are in this, and would like to exchange test philosophies and successes, nothing confidential/restric- ted of course. If this isn't your area, would you pass this on within your organization? Thanks, Michael Young IS/IT QA & Implementation Bell Canada ------------------------------ From: Louis Raphael Subject: Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operators With U.S. Based Excell Date: 7 Feb 1999 09:21:45 GMT Organization: Societe pour la promotion du petoncle vert Mark J Cuccia wrote: > Bell Canada's Operator Services are **NOT** going to be 'relocated' to > Excell Agency's Arizona (USA) HQ's! [Fortunately] it would be almost imposible for them to do this, because getting French-speaking operators in Arizona would be expensive at the very best. That being said, I'm sure that service will suffer greatly - currently, the Bell Operators are simply amazing, and I can't see anything run/operated by "Excell" even beginning to match what these people can do. This truly is a great shame and my heart goes out not only to the operators, but to the tradition of a bygone era of truly outstanding service that they represent. > These contract directory companies (including Excell) are HORRIBLY out > of date in their directory listings, and have all other kinds of > erroneous or missing information. If one needs real local telco > directory, some long distance carriers (LCI/Qwest still does at this > time) still route to the real LEC directory operator of the dialed > area code. I am _NOT_ going to use these contract companies, first > paying for a directory call and only getting bogus information, and > then paying toll to use that bogus info?! That's rather unpalatable, considering that the information is actually out there and available. Plus, even if the information were up to date, a local operator would still be much better, because they're able to handle a query like "I'm looking for a Mr. Albert Green, somewhere in the eastern part of downtown ..." (having a fix on the streets would likely narrow that down to only one or two possibilities). Louis ------------------------------ From: mmcintyr@swichtec.co.nz Subject: Switchmode Power Supplies - consultants Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 22:33:51 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion Fellow toilers: I would be grateful if some(any)one would advise the name(s) of reputable/recognized/better known consultants/analysts in the marketing/engineering aspects of switchmode power supplies (DC power) for the telecommunications industry. I realize this sounds a little vague but I'm feeling my way at present. Thank you, Myles McIntyre mmcintyr@swichtec.co.nz ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 18:34:42 EST From: Erik Rauch Reply-To: Erik Rauch Subject: History of Telco Mergers? Does anyone have a concise history of mergers of the various phone companies over the years? It would be interesting to compare the current spate of mergers with the ones from the late 19th/early 20th centuries that led to the formation of the AT&T monopoly. Erik Rauch Room 434, 545 Tech. Square rauch@mit.edu Cambridge, MA 02139 617-253-8576 http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~rauch ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #9 **************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 9 17:10:33 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA03421; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 17:10:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 17:10:33 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902092210.RAA03421@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #10 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Feb 99 17:10:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 10 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Year 2000 Glitch Meets People Problem: Possible Panic (Monty Solomon) Re: T-1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack (Mel Beckman) Bad Email From MCI (James Bellaire) "Real" Telecommunication (John Kristoff) Terminal Emulation - Wyse, TI (Diller Ryan) Required: VOX File Player For DOS! (Peter Thomas) Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (Trojanella Carter) What is a Prepaid Calling Card (David Vuong) Re: What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare (Adam H. Kerman) M1 Tech Wages (Dan J. Rudiak) Advanced TSAPI/CSTA Development Help Urgently Needed (Anthony Uliano) Re: 609 in New Jersey to Split (Linc Madison) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 ** Article submission address: editor@telecom-digest.org ** Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 11:09:25 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Year 2000 Glitch Meets People Problem: Possible Panic http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/02/biztech/articles/09panic.html By BARNABY J. FEDER LOS ANGELES -- The early fears about the Year 2000 computer problem featured all sorts of machines driven haywire by their inability to read dates in the new year: computer networks that control power, water and phone systems freeze; railroads, airlines and trucks are idled as dispatch and traffic safety systems crash, and the financial universe, from stock markets to payroll systems to automated teller machines, goes on the blink. Jeff T. Green for The New York Times Larry Shook and his wife, Judy Laddon, of Spokane, Wash., stock their shelves in preparation for Year 2000 computer problems. That was before tens of billions of dollars were spent on computer repairs and upgrades. Now, a chorus of regulators, Year 2000 project managers and other authorities warn that Americans fearing the worst may end up inflicting more serious damage on themselves, their neighbors and the economy than anything the computers do. Planning experts say those scenarios could include bank runs, hoarding of food and gasoline, fires caused by misuse of newly acquired wood stoves and generators, and a rise in gun violence stemming from the surge in firearm sales to those fearing civil unrest. "As it becomes clear our national infrastructure will hold, overreaction becomes one of the biggest remaining problems," said John Koskinen, chairman of the President's Commission on Year 2000 Conversion. The challenge is to keep the computer repair work going and prudent preparations for disruptions on track while calming the most nervous citizens. While surveys show most Americans do not expect their lives to be severely disrupted, a significant minority say they are planning big investments of time or money to protect themselves. And the American Red Cross advises the public, as a precaution, to have enough food and other staples on hand to endure disruptions of several days to a week. At a meeting here today, the Year 2000 project committee of the National Retail Federation, endorsing the Red Cross recommendation, called for retailers and manufacturers to develop campaigns aimed at getting consumers to stock up gradually rather than trying to do so in the last few days of 1999. But the group declined to provide any examples of the kind of supplies it thought citizens should stock, fearing that being so specific would be too alarming. "Nobody wins if the public freaks out," said Cathy Hotka, the information technology specialist at the federation, a Washington trade group that includes virtually every major retailing company and trade association except Wal-Mart, the nation's largest retailer. "If the public reacts badly, you could take a potentially minor situation and make it a nightmare." Surveys show that almost half the nation's local governments have not started on Year 2000 repairs. Some sectors, like the banking industry, began addressing public fears months ago. The Federal Reserve, which supplies cash to the banking system, took the lead by announcing its intention to print $50 billion in extra currency -- lifting the total in circulation to $200 billion -- to assure consumers that banks will have plenty of paper for those who want to have extra cash on hand before the end of the year. Individual banks and industry associations have sponsored a wide variety of advertising suggesting that shifting money to the mattress leaves customers wide open to losing it to theft, fires and scam artists, not to mention the temptation to fritter it away on unnecessary luxuries. Some symbolic gestures have already been announced as well. Jane F. Garvey, head of the Federal Aviation Administration, has promised to be flying on New Year's Eve as a show of faith in the air traffic control system. British Airways announced that nearly all of its senior executives would also be aloft. Surveys show that almost half the nation's local governments have not started on Year 2000 repairs and contingency planning and that many small businesses lag just as badly. Multinational companies are bracing for disruptions in Russia and a number of Asian countries where Year 2000 work has been a low priority. Where the work has been done, at home or abroad, testing remains crucial because experience shows that computer system repairs inevitably introduce unanticipated glitches. Thus, President Clinton's only Year 2000 remarks in his State of the Union address homed in on the need to keep working to reduce the risks. Koskinen says complacency is still at least as big a concern as overreaction. "For some people, a certain amount of panic would help," Koskinen said. Pogo's Revenge Remembered The growing questions about behavior management highlight a paradox that computer programmers were among the first to realize: The Year 2000 computer problem, also known as the Millennium Bug and Y2K, probably should have been called something like the Pogo Syndrome after the old comic strip that observed "We have met the enemy and he is us." After all, humans seeded the Year 2000 problem into the technology landscape by using just two digits in programming dates, such as 99 for 1999, to save expensive memory in the 1960's and 1970's. Early on, computer workers began warning that some machines and software would malfunction because they would read 00 as 1900 instead of 2000 or as no date at all. But all too human foibles like sloth, greed and unfounded optimism that someone else -- or new intelligent machines -- would take care of the Year 2000 problem allowed it to grow into an expensive, potentially deadly global challenge. Now, as the race to minimize the machine risks enters its last months, the Year 2000 glitch may test people's trust in one another as much as the reliability of their machines. Do they believe that the repair work has been sound and that most of what is left to be done will be finished? Will workers have the skills and dedication to overcome whatever computer malfunctions do occur? Will citizens be neighborly, rather than selfish? Will political and business leaders step in effectively at the right moments? A tiny minority is already investing heavily in the belief that the answer to these questions is mostly no. Year 2000 alarmists, religious groups that see the computer problem as a pre-ordained divine punishment and survivalists fleeing for rural fortresses are producing measurable bounces in the sale of dehydrated foods, wood-burning stoves, home power generators and other goods at the fringes of the normal economy. Getting a Leg Up on Survivalists More telling though is the number of Americans saying they are considering moves that would clearly be unnecessary if the nation's computer networks end up being as reliable as regulators and industry leaders are projecting. Polls show that around 10 percent of citizens expect to withdraw most or all of their money from banks. A Gallup poll in December found that 17 percent expected to buy either a generator or a wood stove. YEAR 2000 CHECKLIST Efforts to prepare the public for possible disruptions from Year 2000 computer problems involve a delicate balance between encouraging prudence and preventing panic. Here are some of the steps that the American Red Cross is recommending: Check with makers of computer-controlled electronic equipment to see if the devices may be affected: alarm systems, thermostats, appliances, garage door openers, electronic locks and other equipment that might be controlled by an embedded computer chip. Stock disaster supplies to last several days to a week: nonperishable foods, stored water, and an ample supply of medications that you regularly use. As you would in preparing for a storm, have some extra cash or traveler's checks on hand in case transactions involving A.T.M. cards or credit cards cannot be processed. Withdraw money from your bank in small amounts well before Dec. 31. In case the power fails, plan to use alternative cooking devices. Have extra blankets, coats, hats and gloves to keep warm. Do not plan to use gas-fueled appliances, like an oven, to keep warm. Be prepared to relocate to a shelter for warmth and protection during a prolonged power outage or if local officials request or require that you leave your home for any other reason. Have plenty of flashlights and extra batteries on hand. As you would in preparation for a winter storm, keep your car's gas tank above half full. "It's reasonable to assume the population will get very nervous," said Douglass Carmichael, a Washington-based consultant who lectures community groups that public information on Year 2000 progress is too unreliable to justify putting off building substantial food stockpiles and other "safety nets." Dealing with mass nervousness is more art than science. Consultants and Government officials preach that the best way to calm nerves is to make sure that customers and consumers are inundated with the details of the work being done to reduce risks. And many of those organizing on the community level agree. "Statements have to be out there for people to jump on and research," said Margo King, one of a group of organizers who have helped make Boulder, Colo., a pacesetter in local preparedness planning. But John Steiner, Ms. King's husband and fellow organizer, adds that even with more information, many people will retain doubts that could prime them for panic. "On Vietnam, we listened to the people in charge for a long time and everything was going well, and then it wasn't," Steiner said. "The question is what is appropriate contingency planning if things don't turn out as we hope." While those like Steiner and Ms. King crave more details about repairs, most people are apparently not concerned enough to listen. Chase Manhattan Bank officials say consumer fears about the banking system leveled off at about 25 percent in the bank's monthly surveys in the last half of 1998, convincing them that it was too soon to publish extensive information about its Year 2000 work -- lest it be interpreted as an ominous sign rather than reassurance. One way to head off nervousness may be to encourage those most likely to be worried later this year to go ahead and acquire now the supplies that would make them comfortable. "There's sufficient information for people to say there's a substantial risk of disruption," said Charles Halpern, president of the Nathan E. Cummings Foundation, a New York-based foundation that has been providing funds for community preparedness efforts and lobbying other foundations to get involved in Year 2000 work. Halpern wants leaders from President Clinton on down to talk more often and more forcefully about Year 2000 risks. "Overreaction now is so much preferable to overreaction in November that it's a risk worth running," Halpern said. "People who want to lay in supplies of canned vegetables can do it now without disrupting anything." Community Groups Lead the Charge The drumbeat for early, locally based preparation to minimize risks and head off panic is coming from community groups, many of which have gone far beyond advocating stockpiling of necessities. Some suggestions have been ignored, as when Year 2000 organizers in Spokane, Wash., called for a "practice" day last month on which families were to do without such basics as electricity and running water to learn more about what they need to cope with worst-case scenarios. "I think we were the only people who did it," one of the Spokane organizers, Larry Shook, said of himself and his wife, Judy Laddon. Even other members of the organizing group ended up deciding they were "too busy," he said. But such organizers have been building links to local officials in some communities that could lead to broad preparedness efforts. Shook has been hired by Global Action Plan of Woodstock, N.Y., a nonprofit consultant to cities and towns on environmental and social issues, to write a manual on how cities can help citizens prepare for two-day, two-week and two-month disruptions. The manual, which is financed by the Cummings Foundation, is being developed in cooperation with the City of Portland, Ore., which hopes to distribute it to all the city's households this spring. It will also be available on the World Wide Web. Federal authorities are cautiously encouraging community groups like those in Spokane and Boulder, although they fear some of them may end up creating more alarm than preparation. Many have become distribution channels for planning materials such as those developed by the Red Cross and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which expects to publish by the end of this month new advice tailored to the Year 2000 problem rather than to natural disasters. "People ultimately have a lot of common sense, so the real goal is to give them all the information we have," Koskinen said. Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 00:13:37 -0800 From: Mel Beckman Subject: Re: T-1 Cabling Between Demarc and Equipment Rack On 5 Feb 1999 16:14:50 GMT, Steve Pinkston said: >> The Network Interface Unit that the telco provides strips >> off the driving current (about 140 volts) that carried the signal to >> your office. > The current you speak of is the simplex current, which has nothing > to do with the T1 signal directly, but is used to power the repeaters > in the line, and sometimes the NIU, as well. It used to also be used > to power the CSU, but that is rare these days. It's fantastic to have a Kentrox person with Steve's background contributing! There is so much black magic in T1 installation that you can never have too much good advice. When Steve talked about the equalization of a hard loop on the end of an extended demarc, I slapped my forehead. Dang! This is just the sort of test I do all the time, and I've seen the weird behavior Steve describes (errors disappearing) but could never understand it. That one tip is worth a free lunch! ;) Regarding the 140v phantom power, Steve is, of course, correct. My explanation was poorly worded. What I meant was that the repeaters in the span use the 140V phantom power to regenerate and re-drive the signal, but that the NIU, which may use this power to energize it's circuitry, doesn't regen the signal on true T1s. HDSL is a different animal, since the two-wire HDSL encoding must be converted to ordinary T1 encoding, which requires regeneration. However, even in HDSL NIUs I find that the signal level is much lower than the output of a repeater. (There are 4-wire HDSL circuits, which usually serve a shelf of four NIUs, and in that case I'm pretty sure that the HDSL NIU doesn't have enough available power to drive four full T1s). One last tidbit: the 140V phantom power on the wires leading to the NIU can zap you (and at 140 mA, it's enough to kill you). That's why hicaps have red insulated bridge clips -- they're warning you to stay clear. Mel Beckman ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 09:32:55 -0500 From: James Bellaire Subject: Bad Email from MCI It looks like MCI has decided to break privacy as well. I just received an announcement from them about some change in their website, with 21 addresses on the TO line instead of using the BCC line. The email was sent from and contains the note: ****************************************************************** NOTE: Responses to this e-mail will not be answered. Please send inquiries via www.mci.com/service ****************************************************************** At least there were only 20 other customers on the TO line - this could have been worse. James [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But there were actually many such 'clusters' with 20-21 names on each. So your group of 21 knows about each other, the next group of 21 knows about each other, etc. Actually, I would not be too harsh on them; their problem is more one of ignorance than malicious intent. I get messages like that a lot, where everyone is loaded into the 'to:' line and you have to page through screen after screen of names before you get to the real intent of the email. They simply do not understand or know any better. In this Digest, readers via the mailing list will note that the Digest is 'mailed' to one person only: my name is in the 'to:' line; everyone else is in the 'bcc:' line. What I actually do is mail it to myself and the bcc: is to an alias which when it is triggered tells sendmail to :include: a carefully concealed script in a directory of mine at a site somewhere which has a few thousand email addresses in it. The stream comes along, looks in one of my directories and is told where to go look for the file in question. Don't get any smart ideas; the delivery of the stream is to a file of mine which is only read/writeable by user and group not by others. I am the user and the group consists of me, a couple aliases for Digest administration purposes and 'nobody', which is sendmail's name in case you did not know it. You did not think sendmail runs as root around here did you? It gets this file and sits there plodding along loading the lines of that file (an email address per line) until it gets through. Then it looks at me as a 'trusted user' (in unix/sendmail parlance) and allows me to set -f so the mailing actually appears to come from 'editor@telecom-digest.org'. The whole thing is then dropped in the mailq and off it goes. All the above is an automated script of course; I don't actually sit here and do these steps one by one. I just use the techniques any professional and effecient spammer would use. But I get mail from users at AO-Hell where I swear, the guy must have sat there all afternoon typing all the names in one after another in the 'to' line. And several years ago, I remember having problems with MCI Mail and this Digest of the very same nature as Jim describes in his note: I have a couple hundred users of MCI Mail on my mail list here. When MCI would get its single copy of the Digest and the list of names in the bcc: to whom it should distribute the mail, it would immediatly break up the list in little groups of twenty or so names each, pack them all in the 'to' line and send it out. Then if a *single* name in the newly (by them) created 'to' line was incorrect, they would bounce the entire mailing to those twenty names back to me without saying *which email address was the bad one* ... so nineteen good users did not get their copy of the Digest and I had no idea which name to remove. Then maybe the next issue to hit their gateway, they would regroup the names in other clusters of twenty, causing even more confusion. Finally for a while I had to take all MCI Mail readers and send them individual pieces of test mail with a code buried in the subject line so I could get individual items of bounced mail back and figure out who to remove. No Jim, I would say 'privacy violation' means the wholesale collec- tion and redistribution of email addresses for some kind of profit motive. I would not use the term to describe the handling of mail by some incompetent goofus running a mailing list or whatever. I put those in the same category as the people who try to dial a phone number, get the shakes and dial the wrong number by accident and then click off without so much as an apology or acknowlegement that they got a wrong number. An invasion of privacy? Yeah, but what would the world be like without them? PAT] ------------------------------ From: John Kristoff Subject: "Real" Telecommunication Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 10:44:21 -0600 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions here! oprempj@mail.ustrust.com wrote in message ... > Think about this: in order to "improve" or upgrade my local area network > I must change my NIC, modify my applications, change my media type, swap > out hubs, routers, switches, etc .... This is stupid. I've often lamented over the lack of being able to simply plug in a network connection and it just works. However, there is an architec- tural difference between data networks and legacy telecommunications. This difference creates a big trade-off. The trade-off can be debated to the world's end, but just to point it out ... Traditional circuit-switched networks have all the intelligence built into the network so all the end devices can remain unchanged. I could keep my analog phone on my desk for years. To make improvements in the network, they are all done without having to visit the existing end user. Cellular phones are a good example. Packet switching however puts the burden at the end nodes. To improve the intelligence of this network, you have to change your end nodes. In addition, many of the points you made also have to do with bandwidth requirements. My bandwidth requirements for a voice call has never changed. The same cannot be said of data networking. Dialing up to a BBS 10 years ago generally required a lot less bandwidth than browsing the web today. 64Kbps isn't enough, 1Mbps isn't, 10Mbps isn't, 100Mbps isn't and so on. As the end application changes, more and more bandwidth all the way out to the end user increases, causing the network to change much more rapidly than we might like. John ------------------------------ From: dryan@slonet.org (Diller Ryan) Subject: Terminal Emulation - Wyse, TI Organization: SLONET Regional Information Access Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 23:06:51 GMT Is anyone aware of a terminal emulation package that runs under Linux and emulates a Wyse 60 or Texas Instrunents 924? Shareware or commercial; I'm limited to the above terminals; Thanks for any pointers, Diller ------------------------------ From: see-my-sig-for-real-e-mail-addy@nospam.demon.co.uk (Peter Thomas) Subject: Required: VOX File Player For DOS! Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 19:06:05 GMT The company I work for (a data capture company, which works with telephone audio responses) is in desparate need of a program for MS-DOS. Does anyone know of a program that can play .VOX files and can run with our data-entry applications (ie: stay in the background - TSR)? I've taken a web search, and found one program, which, alas is for Windows specific PCs only. If anyone does know of such a program for DOS, whether it be commercial, shareware or freeware, please let me know! Or, on the other hand, if you're a programmer, and can write such a program for us, do get in touch! Thanks a lot. Peter Thomas pete [at] prodge.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ From: Trojanella Carter Subject: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 22:08:58 -0800 Organization: gte.net Hi, I'm have Windows 98 completely installed on my system. In fact it came with it already along with the Y2K upgrades. But I'm having problems using files I've downloaded from the Internet. My system keep telling me that it cannot locate Winzip32.exe. If you have any advice it would be very helpful and very much appreciated. Thanks. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: winzip32.exe is a pretty common program and I am sure someone reading this will send you a copy, assuming there is none on your machine for some reason. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 12:02:05 -0800 From: David Vuong Subject: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? I would like to know what is a prepaid calling card and how is it works. Thank you, Diana [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A prepaid calling card is like a regular calling card, where calls you make are billed to a third number with one difference: You deposit a sum of money in advance with telco (or the card issuer if not the same) so they do not have to give you credit or trust that you will pay them when the bill comes due. In return for you loaning them money for their cash 'float' which may not have to be paid back by them in the form of services rendered for a long time, the card issuer expresses his appreciation for your advance payment by charging you sometimes twice as much per minute for a call as he does his customers with credit accounts and in many cases he adds on a service charge as well. Prepaid calling cards are BAD NEWS unless your credit is so bad that not a single telco anywhere (and traditionally they have very loose and liberal credit policies) will give you an account without money up front. Oh, I have heard all the excuses: I travel a lot and do not have a place to get bills in the mail; I use pay phones a lot and do not want to look around trying to get change for the coin box; I want my calls to be private with no audit trail of where I called. Only the last one gets any respect from me, and even then, if you do not know how to confuse the issue of where you called and from where and etc, then you are a very ill-equipped traveler indeed. The phone company would not have created loop arounds, call forwarding to and from cell phones and voicemail if they did not want travelers to benefit from them. As for a place to get mail, I would make an effort to find a mail drop somewhere where the proprietor minds his own business and expects you to do the same. For the most part, I think regular use of a cell phone turns out less expensive than most or all prepaid calling cards and is certainly more convenient. This reminds me of American Express Traveler's Cheques and money orders. Amex has stated in the past they have a float of about two million dollars per day based on Traveler's Cheques purchased but not yet redeemed. Two million per day! I wish someone would loan me a million dollars for a couple hours ... well that might be cutting things close, but let's say a day or two; I would return it with interest and have gobs of cash for myself as well. I suspect the telcos have some money laying around on prepaid calling cards also. Now in fact, cash is anonymous and once it is gone, its gone. With traveler's checks and money orders, in theory they are replaceable with Amex insuring their safety. But you can obtain the same results by using a cash card at an ATM machine, at least until January 1, 2000, taking only what you need each time. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ahk@chinet.chinet.com (Adam H. Kerman) Subject: Re: What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare Date: 8 Feb 1999 13:26:07 -0600 Organization: chinet In article , Brian Vita wrote: > At this time, the likely contender for our LD service appears to be > Qwest Communications. I would be interested in hearing any feedback > that users may have about them. Based on a recommendation by Mark Cuccia (that calls to directory assistance are still routed to the directory assistance bureaus of the actual incumbent local exchange carrier for an area code), I tried to sign up for an account two months ago. As far as I can tell, the sales lady destroyed all evidence of my order and nothing was processed. I should beg to become a customer? Screw that. ------------------------------ From: Dan J. Rudiak Subject: M1 Tech Wages Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1999 12:01:06 -0700 Organization: Calgary Tri-West Soccer Hello All, After ten years in Tech Support at Nortel, I find myself in the job market. I have been afforded an opportunity with a local independent dealer to start up the M1 side of the business, pretty much writing my own ticket. Based on the market out there, what should I be pricing that ticket at? Thanks! Dan J. Rudiak ------------------------------ From: Anthony Uliano Subject: Advanced TSAPI/CSTA Development Help Urgently Needed Date: 8 Feb 1999 03:19:22 GMT Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. We are developing a TSAPI/CSTA telephony server that interfaces with SAP R/3, and need urgent help. We are located in Richmond, VA, and are willing to work out great financial arrangements for the right developer. If you have practical experience with TSAPI/CSTA or a major CTI (Callpath, Genesys, etc.) as a developer, please drop me a note as soon as possible. Please use my auliano@amconsulting.com e-mail address. Thanks. Regards, Anthony Uliano auliano@amconsulting.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1999 12:06:45 -0800 From: Telecom@ns2.downtown.com (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: 609 in New Jersey to Split Organization: LincMad Consulting In article , Carl Moore wrote: > KYW news-radio reports today that splitting 609 geographically has > been approved. The new area code, not yet known, will go to the > western part (Camden etc., near Philadelphia), and 609 will remain > in the eastern part, including Atlantic City. I didn't catch where > Trenton, the state capital, will end up. 609 will remain in Trenton, most of Burlington County, Atlantic City, and Cape May. The new area code will go to Camden, Cherry Hill, and Vineland. ** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom@LincMad-com URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM" << ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #10 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 12 13:38:15 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA11130; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 13:38:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 13:38:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902121838.NAA11130@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #11 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Feb 99 13:38:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 11 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson You Call, You Pay (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "Fighting Computer Crime", Donn B. Parker (Rob Slade) Book Review: "1999 Canadian Internet Handbook" (Rob Slade) Validating the Format of an International Telephone Number (Robert Bonomi) Early Y2K Casualty? (John N. Riggins) Re: Required: VOX File Player For DOS! (James Gifford) Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (David Clayton) Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (Al Varney) Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (Jeffrey M. Vinocur) Re: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? (Anthony Argyriou) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: "Monty Solomon" Subject: You Call, You Pay Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 15:29:13 -0500 http://www.wired.com/news/print_version/business/story/17843.html You Call, You Pay Reuters Federal telephone regulators are preparing to let wireless carriers charge people for making calls to cellular and PCS phones, hoping to boost competition with land-based local phone networks. Although the use of mobile phones has risen dramatically, few people have fully replaced their land lines with cellular or PCS units -- in part because under current rules, the phone owner pays both for calls made and calls received. Mobile phone use in the United States lags behind Europe. But Federal Communications Commission Chairman William Kennard said Tuesday that he had studied so-called 'calling party pays' system in use in Europe and was ready to move forward with a similar system for the United States. "It's time for us to find a way to implement a calling party pays system in this country," Kennard said in a speech at the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association's annual conference in New Orleans. "Only 5 percent of all calls are now made on mobile phones. I think that number would increase dramatically with a calling party pays system." The FCC is likely to issue proposed rules in May or June for allowing wireless carriers to implement calling party pays systems, an FCC staff person said. However, two major issues are yet to be resolved, the staffer added. First, the agency needs to determine what notice a person calling a mobile phone customer would receive about the charges they are about to incur. Unlike calling another land-based number, which usually is covered by a customer's flat rate monthly charge, calling a wireless phone user could result in charges ranging anywhere from 10 cents to US$1 per minute. Also to be determined is how billing and collection will be structured for calling party pays. Some wireless carriers want the FCC to require local phone companies to do billing and collection for calling party pays, but others are willing to rely on third-party billing companies. "It's going to be a big proceeding, a difficult proceeding," the FCC staffer said. Copyright 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:19:41 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Fighting Computer Crime", Donn B. Parker Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKFICMCR.RVW 981106 "Fighting Computer Crime", Donn B. Parker, 1998, 0-471-16378-3, U$34.99/C$49.50 %A Donn B. Parker dparker@sric.sri.com %C 5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON M9B 6H8 %D 1998 %G 0-471-16378-3 %I John Wiley & Sons, Inc. %O U$34.99/C$49.50 416-236-4433 fax: 416-236-4448 rlangloi@wiley.com %P 512 p. %T "Fighting Computer Crime: A New Framework for Protecting Information" Parker feels that too much of the data security field concentrates on technical answers to the problems of reliability, integrity, and availability of data, and doesn't pay sufficient attention to those people who are deliberately out to read, steal, or ruin your information and systems. Personally, I find it rather ironic that he defines "crimoids," in chapter one, as minor events promoted to much higher significance by the media, and public misperceptions. In the non-specialist realm, more people spend more time worrying about "hackers" than ever back up their drives. (I am reminded of a friend; an intelligent and educated person who started his career programming large and sophisticated information systems and who has now risen to the executive ranks; who has for years refused to get a modem for his home computer. In spite of his frequently expressed desire for access to the Internet, and my repeated assurances that with his current computer and operating system there is no hidden danger, he remains convinced that the mere attachment of a modem to his machine will allow someone to break into his computer and damage it.) Who, then, is this book written for? The author does not say, but what he does say in the preface seems to indicate that he is not writing for those whose business cards make reference to security. (I have neither argument nor inclination to dispute Parker's assertion that security "professionals" do not really deserve the designation.) But if this text is aimed at the general public, chapter one's emphasis on the dangers and lack of protection would seem more inclined to incite further panic, rather than a realistic and measured response. Chapter two is an interesting and useful examination of an often unasked question in the field: what is the nature of the information we are supposedly securing? There are valuable side points, such as both the danger and the opportunity in the security arena presented by the Year 2000 problem. At the same time, I have to note that an erroneous description of the Cascade virus is an example of Parker's asserting points that are just beyond the available facts, and, for me anyway, has an unfortunate effect on the trustworthiness of the work as a whole. The review of cybercrime, in chapter three, has more reference to journalism and other forms of fiction than to reality, but I have to agree with everything said there. Computer misuse and abuse is discussed in chapter four. (As if to make up for chapter two, the section on viruses is very good.) Network misuse is covered in chapter five, and although I still have trouble believing in the reality of salami attacks (Parker's sole example is said to have resulted in a conviction, but no citation is given) I am a bit more willing to accept his broader definition. Chapter six is extremely strong in portraying a realistic and broadly based analysis of characteristics of computer criminals. A similarly informed and balanced approach distinguishes chapter seven, regarding hacker culture, but there is also a universally condemnatory tone that is not wholly justified by the facts as presented. Chapter eight is a very helpful first step for those wanting to deal in the art of computer security. Chapter nine reviews the deficiencies in most current security practices, noting overprotection in some areas while ignoring loopholes in others, and a flowery jargon that serves mostly to hide the fact that security people just don't feel very comfortable with what is going on. However, Parker's new model of security, in chapter ten, while it is very clear and useful, does not extend recent work in, say, electronic commerce. On the one hand, this congruence does support the model, but on the other, one can't really say it is too novel. The popular, but demonstrably incomplete, risk assessment study is de-emphasized in favour of a more difficult, but more realistic, baseline security standard in chapter eleven. Details on how to conduct such a study are very helpfully given in chapter twelve, although the benchmark chart is going to be much harder to come by than is made clear in the text. Chapter thirteen provides a practical and useful set of criteria for determining control objectives. A number of security tactics are detailed in chapter fourteen. Chapter fifteen takes the larger strategic view. (I was delighted to see the inclusion of a section on corporate ethics in this chapter. Recently I contracted to produce a security document for an educational institution, and was told to take the section on ethics out.) Management of security, in chapter sixteen, includes provisions for training, policy, and other factors. Chapter seventeen finishes off with a look to the future. The material, while thought- provoking, is possibly more likely to generate arguments than solutions. Parker's stance on security in general definitely puts him in the camp of the professional paranoids. However, absent the first and last chapters, there is a lot of good, solid knowledge here to help educate any security practitioner. The material in the second half of the book is just as valuable to the security process as the more technical works such as "Practical UNIX and Internet Security" (cf. BKPRUISC.RVW) by Spafford and Garfinkel, albeit in quite a different way. An informed security policy is every bit as important as a good set of "access" controls. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1998 BKFICMCR.RVW 981106 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 08:33:10 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "1999 Canadian Internet Handbook" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKCANINT.RVW 990109 "1999 Canadian Internet Handbook", Jim Carroll/Rick Broadhead, 1998, 0-13-974940-3 ISSN 1204-9034, C$27.95 %A Jim Carroll jcarroll@jimcarroll.com www.jimcarroll.com %A Rick Broadhead rickb@sympatico.ca www.rickbroadhead.com %C Scarborough, Ontario %D 1998 %G 0-13-974940-3 ISSN 1204-9034 %I Prentice Hall Canada %O C$27.95 800-576-3800 416-293-3621 www.phcanada.com %P 376 p. + CD-ROM %T "1999 Canadian Internet Handbook" Unlike the first five editions of this book, there is no tutorial or introductory material to help you get onto the net. This is, therefore, a fairly completely new book from those that have gone before, and addresses a new and different audience. In fact, it may be said to be four new books, since the structure divides the book into four quite significantly differing topics. Part one shows this departure from tradition by assuming not only that you are on the net, but that you have your own Web site, and need to evaluate it's effectiveness. Chapter one provides a checklist of some technical questions and tools you can use to review your own site. The points are fairly standard, but important. One topic which does not get much mention is a focus on the objective and aim of your site. Promotion is the aim of chapter two, and while it lists a number of tricks to get you listed favorably in search engines, there is no discussion of the many other ways you can use to net to get the word out. (No, I am *not* talking about spam. Sheesh.) A number of Webmasters are asked for advice in chapter three. The resulting deluge of points has interesting bits, and is generally well chosen, although it may look a bit chaotic. Part two deals with some security topics. Chapter four, on malicious software, seems to be somewhat disjointed. While I ultimately agreed with most of the specific material, the overall impression seemed a bit misleading, and I found few points which would be helpful in protecting the average computer user. Backup is important, of course, but chapter five looks at some tools for a very specific backup problem, that of copying your Web site itself. Privacy concerns expressed in chapter six may be legitimate, but are definitely inflated. Again, the material is not terribly helpful, for example, recommending the use of outside programs for cookie management without explaining the simple browser configuration steps that can be taken to eliminate the problem. Security is a complicated subject, and the coverage of system cracking in chapter seven is just too simplistic. Part three looks at making your net time more productive. Chapter eight is a grab bag of random tips. An overview of methods for increasing both real and apparent access speed is given in chapter nine. Chapter ten looks at some tools for managing mail and Web pages. Chapter eleven reviews remote access software and videoconferencing. Query management tools for a variety of Web search engines and directories are described in chapter twelve. Chapter thirteen looks at personalizable news services. Part four comes full circle in that it talks about enhancing the Web site that you assessed in part one. Chapter fourteen introduces e-commerce programs. Audio and video additions are discussed in chapter fifteen. A concluding chapter looks at the future of the net by extension from the popularity of the Linux operating system. From Alexander Graham Bell to Marshall McLuhan to X.25 to archie, Canadians have been in the forefront of communications technology. The question is, what makes this a specifically Canadian Internet book. The answer, unfortunately, seems to lie solely in the citizenship of the authors. Is it at least a handbook? Well, generally a handbook is noted either for completeness of coverage of a field, or small size and cogent facts. This book does not cover the Internet in scope, concentrating almost completely on the Web, rather than the net, and not even exhausting that. Nor is it an essential minimum of information. It doesn't even have much focus. There is good and useful information contained in the book. It is, however, very difficult to find a specific audience that would benefit from it. I note the assignment of an ISSN (International Standard Serial Number) to it: perhaps one should best consider this to be the latest issue of a magazine, presenting information that may be of interest, but in no particular arrangement. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994, 1999 BKCANINT.RVW 990109 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ From: Robert Bonomi Subject: Validating the Format of an International Telephone Number Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 09:29:16 -0600 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com I'm writing some software for, in-house use, that has to cope with international (full world-wide) telephone numbers. There is an issue of an unacceptly high rate of various kinds of data-entry error on non-NANP numbers -- mostly because the people doing data-entry don't know what all the 'foreign' numbers are "supposed" to look like. I've located material which lets me extract the 'country code" part -- now I just need to determine if the _rest_ is a valid number, IN THE CONTEXT of that country code. for instance: "state code" required -- if 1st digit is 1 thru 5, it's one digit long if 1st digit is 6 thru 8, it's two digits if 1st digit is 9, and second digit is 0 thru 6, it's 3 digits if second digit is 7 or 8, it's 4 digits second digit of 9 is not used first digit of '0' is unused 'city code' follows -- if 1st digit is 1 thru 8, it's two digits if 1st digit is 9, and 2nd digit is 0-7, it's three digits 2nd digit is 8, it's 4 digits 2nd digit of 9 is unused first digit of '0' is unused. 'local number' follows -- if 1st digit is 5 thru 9, it's 4 digits if 1st digit is 3 or 4, it's 5 digits if 1st digit is 2, it's 6 digits Is there a compendium of this kind of information,anywhere, for the WHOLE WORLD ?? Or, failing that, for anywhere? Most immediate need is Mexico (non-NANP), South America (all), various W. Europe, anc Central America. NOTE: I'm NOT trying to do a 'full' verify of the number -- to wit, for NANP, I just check number of digits, and make sure 1st one and 4th one are not '0' or '1'. -- whether the 'area code', or 'exchange prefix' (within *that* area-code, that is) is actually valid/in-use, I _don't_ worry about. robert bonomi @ .com ------------------------------ From: John N. Riggins Subject: Early Y2K Casualty? Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 22:42:47 -0600 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions here! From the "Nashville Tennessean", February 9, 1999: "Y2K bug closes local call center" "A Nashville call center is one of the area's earliest casualties of the year 2000 technology bug, saying it will shut its doors Sunday after 15 years of operation, in part because a fix was too costly. "Bernard C. Harris Publishing Company, a White Plains, N.Y.-based alumni directory company, announced the shutdown of its regional call center on West End Avenue (Nashville, TN) in December ... 'We're on some fairly old technology here, and it's not Y2K compliant, nor will it be Y2K compliant. Our lease also expires at the end of February, and although our landlord has been very accommodating, they just can't extend it any more.' said Nashville call center manager Paul McCann. "He noted that cost projections for new equipment coupled with a move range from $1 million to $2 million." The article goes on to say that other regional call centers in Austin, Texas and Norfolk, Virginia will probably not be similarly affected. Obviously Y2K was not the only consideration leading to the closing but it appears to have been a major factor in the final decision. Anyone aware of any other examples of *actual* adverse effects due to the Y2K issue? -== JNR ==- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So a telemarketer goes out of business due to the Y2K bug ... isn't that a pity! I'll cry about it some other time maybe. I would say there is one real benefit we have overlooked; the fact that many shoestring operations which have major sources of annoyance in our lives for years now such as the dinner-hour callers trying to sell us something and the spammers who fill our email boxes with load of get-rich-quick schemes every day may find it too expensive to continue operations with the cost and work involved in upgrading their systems. PAT] ------------------------------ From: James Gifford Reply-To: gifford@ns.net Organization: Heinlein Central | CT Magazine Subject: Re: Required: VOX File Player For DOS! Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 22:22:26 GMT Peter Thomas wrote: > The company I work for (a data capture company, which works with > telephone audio responses) is in desparate need of a program for > MS-DOS. > Does anyone know of a program that can play .VOX files and can run > with our data-entry applications (ie: stay in the background - TSR)? Maybe if you explain the need a little more, someone here can help. I can't imagine a situation where you'd need a TSR .VOX player. Most of the audio editing apps have moved to Windows, but nearly all had DOS versions that may still be available. CoolEdit is one, I'm pretty sure. Another is Audio Toolbox, which I'm pretty sure is obsolete -- I have an unopened DOS version here on the shelf, but I don't know if it will do the sort of TSR job you need done. Dialogic may have some utility packages that support simple .VOX playing. Hope that is some help. | James Gifford | | Associate Editor, Computer Telephony Magazine | | = Speaking only for myself in this case = | ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 07:11:31 GMT Organization: Customer of OzEmail/Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Trojanella Carter contributed the following: > I'm have Windows 98 completely installed on my system. In fact it came > with it already along with the Y2K upgrades. But I'm having problems > using files I've downloaded from the Internet. My system keep telling > me that it cannot locate Winzip32.exe. If you have any advice it would > be very helpful and very much appreciated. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: winzip32.exe is a pretty common program > and I am sure someone reading this will send you a copy, assuming > there is none on your machine for some reason. PAT] Considering Winzip is shareware that should be paid for, this is probably not a good idea. There are many freeware zip programs about for Windows, "Enzip" springs to mind as a good one. Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Still think the 20th century ends after 1999? Check this URL: http://riemann.usno.navy.mil/AA/faq/docs/faq2.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, people who distribute shareware are usually happy to have assistance in distributing it. It is not that it should not be distributed, but rather, that the new user (of that shareware) should also make the suggested payment to the author. This Digest is an example of 'shareware' in that sense. I am more than happy to see people distribute it entirely or for that matter, cut and paste individual articles, etc to other places where there can be some benefit. I only ask that those who benefit make some token contribution to assist me. I think most shareware authors feel the same way. By all means, if our earlier correspondent gets a copy of winzip32.exe somewhere, all the licensing requirements which go with it should be obeyed. PAT] ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp2.ih.lucent.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer Date: 12 Feb 1999 14:49:20 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Naperville, IL Reply-To: varney@lucent.com In article , Trojanella Carter wrote: >.... My system keep telling me that it cannot locate Winzip32.exe. If > you have any advice it would be very helpful and very much appreciated. WINZIP is a commercial product of Nico Mak Computing, not part of "Windows 98". See . Al Varney ------------------------------ From: jmv16@cornell.edu (Jeffrey M. Vinocur) Subject: Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 17:10:20 -0500 Organization: Cornell University Look for it at http://www.winzip.com/ One of the few programs you don't need winzip to get at (otherwise it'd be a bit of a bootstrapping problem). Jeff Vinocur jmv16@cornell.edu ------------------------------ From: anthony@alphageo.com (Anthony Argyriou) Subject: Re: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 01:52:47 GMT Organization: Alpha Geotechnical Reply-To: anthony@alphageo.com TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to David Vuong : > Oh, I have heard all the excuses: I travel a lot and do not have a > place to get bills in the mail; I use pay phones a lot and do not > want to look around trying to get change for the coin box; I want > my calls to be private with no audit trail of where I called. Only > the last one gets any respect from me, and even then, if you do not > know how to confuse the issue of where you called and from where and > etc, then you are a very ill-equipped traveler indeed. The privacy excuse also requires some work to keep up - apparently the FBI tracked Timothy McVeigh through a prepaid calling card he kept refilling. See the latest issue of 2600 for details. Of course, if he had just kept buying new ones at local liquor stores, they would not have been able to do this. Anthony Argyriou ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #11 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 12 14:50:24 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA14183; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 14:50:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 14:50:24 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902121950.OAA14183@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #12 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Feb 99 14:50:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 12 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Book Review: "Intrusion Detection", Terry Escamilla (Rob Slade) Lawsuits Challenge Search Engines' Practice of 'Selling' (Monty Solomon) Zero-Knowledge: Nothing Personal (Monty Solomon) Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA (Mark W. Schumann) Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operator Comments (Lou Jahn) What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare - Revisited (Brian Vita) Re: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? (Daryl R. Gibson) DS3 Signalling (Baris Aksoy) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 08:33:14 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Intrusion Detection", Terry Escamilla Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINTRDT.RVW 990108 "Intrusion Detection", Terry Escamilla, 1998, 0-471-29000-9, U$39.99/C$56.50 %A Terry Escamilla %C 5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON M9B 6H8 %D 1998 %G 0-471-29000-9 %I John Wiley & Sons, Inc. %O U$39.99/C$56.50 416-236-4433 fax: 416-236-4448 rlangloi@wiley.com %P 348 p. %T "Intrusion Detection: Network Security Beyond the Firewall" Maybe my perception is skewed from having been involved with physical security as well as the computer kind, but I see intrusion detection as being part of security. There is no security system that cannot be penetrated or bypassed, and so detection is, in my view, simply a fact of security life. Isn't that what auditing, one of the main pillars of data security, all about? So I find the attempt to sell the idea of intrusion detection somewhat redundant. Then there is the emphasis on reviewing commercial Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS). Part one looks at what happens before intrusion detection: the traditional role and model of computer security. Chapter one provides a brief, but reasonably sound, overview of this classic paradigm, concentrating on defining most of the theoretical terms used. Some identification and authentication details from both UNIX and Windows NT start our chapter two, which then meanders through a few examples of password cracking, and finally ends with a look at ticket granting systems and other authentication improvements. A similar look at access control is provided by chapter three. Given the complexity of networking and network security, the number of topics covered in chapter four is unsurprising. Part two looks at intrusion detection by extending the traditional security design. Chapter five is fairly pivotal, as evidenced by the title "Intrusion Detection and Why You Need It." The "why" part comes first, with a rather weak example showing that security systems can have loopholes if you don't configure or program everything properly. Intrusion detection then seems to be defined as the usual game of find vulnerability-fix-repeat, only in automated form. A number of possible attacks are mentioned in chapter six, and then a promotion of the addition of an IDS layer to a system, without a corresponding reiteration of the warning, from chapter four, that layers in a system increase the possibility of loopholes. I was rather astonished that SATAN [Security Administrator's Tool for Analyzing Networks] was not included with the vulnerability scanners mentioned in chapter seven. Two more sophisticated products are reviewed in chapter eight. Chapter nine looks at the possibility of catching intruders by traffic analysis, although "catch" seems to be too strong a term to use here. Since most of the foregoing deals with UNIX, chapter ten looks at similar products for NT, although most of the material seems to concentrate on NT's own audit logs. Part three looks at dealing with an intrusion once you have detected it. Chapter eleven recommends being prepared well, detecting early, analyzing thoroughly, and deciding judiciously. In one useful piece of advice, it recommends against an attack on a system you may think is hitting on yours. Chapter twelve is a quick summary of the book. As the author admits, in the final chapter, that intrusion detection systems are not the final word in computer security, I am inescapably reminded of the battles in the antiviral field over the relative strengths of scanners, activity monitors, and change detection systems. What works best? A combination approach, of course. The price of a secure system is more budget for administration time and tools. This book does not present any radically new approach or technique for system security. In fact, with the emphasis on proprietary commercial products, the work will date quite quickly. For those who are looking to add an automated IDS to their current network, the volume could act as a kind of incomplete buyer's guide. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKINTRDT.RVW 990108 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:40:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Lawsuits Challenge Search Engines' Practice of 'Selling' http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/cyber/cyberlaw/12law.html By CARL S. KAPLAN Lawsuits Challenge Search Engines' Practice of 'Selling' Trademarks An Internet surfer seeking Playboy's Web site decides to get help from Excite, a major search engine. The prospector goes to Excite's home page and enters the word "Playboy" in the search box. Then a funny thing happens. A banner advertisement for an explicit pornographic Web site appears, high above the list of pages generated by the search. But that site has nothing to do with Playboy. Is it sneaky and illegal for Excite to display a non-Playboy advertisement to a user who enters the trademarked words "Playboy" or "Playmate?" Or is it fair play because search engines, like the Yellow Pages, naturally create the opportunity for advertising aimed at people seeking certain information? Last week Playboy Enterprises Inc. gave its answer to the question by filing an important lawsuit against Excite Inc. and Netscape Communications Corp., a licensee of Excite's search engine. The suit challenges their practice of having advertisements for pornographic sites appear whenever a user of the search engines enters one of Playboy's trademarks as a search term. This practice has "hijacked and usurped" Playboy's reputation, the company said in legal papers filed in federal court in Los Angeles last week. The case was recently transferred to federal court in Santa Ana, California. The lawsuit, which seeks an injunction and unspecified damages, claims that Excite and Netscape, by their "unauthorized use" of the Playboy trademarks to sell targeted banner ads, are committing trademark infringement, unfair competition and related offenses. The lawsuit also challenges the companies' practice of providing links to special directories of pornography sites along with the search results for "Playboy" or "Playmate." Those directories prominently feature the sites of advertisers, according to legal papers. Spokeswomen for Excite and Netscape declined comment on the lawsuit. A lawyer for Playboy, Jeffrey D. Neuburger, and a spokeswoman for Playboy, also declined to comment. The Playboy case is not the only lawsuit that challenges what some experts say is a common advertising practice at search engine companies. Last month three subsidiaries of the Estie Lauder Companies Inc. filed suit in federal court in New York against Excite Inc. and The Fragrance Counter Inc., an online seller of cosmetics and fragrances. In its lawsuit, Estie Lauder claimed, among other things, that when a consumer uses the Excite search engine or Webcrawler, which is owned by Excite, and types "Estie Lauder" as a keyword, a misleading Fragrance Counter banner ad appears that features the Estie Lauder name. Estie Lauder said that The Fragrance Counter is not an authorized retailer of its products. Spokeswomen for Estie Lauder and Excite declined to comment on the lawsuit. A spokesman for The Fragrance Counter, based in Brentwood, N.Y., said the case was without merit. Based on a recent look at the sites targeted by the suit, it appears that The Fragrance Counter has changed its ads so that they no longer contain Estie Lauder's trademarks. Online advertising experts say it is a common and lucrative practice for Internet search engines, many of which are now part of larger "portal" sites, to sell banner ads linked to particular search keywords, including trademarked terms. "I would estimate that 20 to 30 percent of a portal's ad revenues" are generated from such targeted banner ads, said Marissa Gluck, an analyst at Jupiter Communications, a New York research firm. Playboy said it did not object to tying a banner ad to a "neutral" search term, such as "baseball." Nick Copley, director of business development for Thomson & Thomson, a company based in Quincy, Mass., that tracks search engines, said that if courts hold that banner advertising triggered by trademark keywords may only be sold to the trademark holder, "it will have quite an effect on the business model of search engines." Playboy's lawsuit is much broader than the Estie Lauder case because it attacks the right of a search engine company to sell banner ads in this way. In essence, Playboy is arguing in its suit that a banner ad appearing with the results of a search for one of its famous trademark terms might confuse Web users, making them think that Playboy is a sponsor of, or somehow connected to, the banner ad buyer. But some legal experts dispute this argument. They claim that consumers are not likely to be confused about the relationship between a pornographic banner ad merchant and Playboy when they use the search term "Playboy." "I would compare this case to a drugstore, where you walk down the aisle looking for Tylenol and you spot it on the shelf next to a generic-brand pill," said Carl Oppedahl, an lawyer who specializes in Internet litigation. "That is not confusing to the consumer. And I don't think there is any confusion to Playboy consumers on the search engine Web site." Mark Lemley, a professor of law at the University of Texas, also believes that Playboy will have a difficult time proving that the ad practices in question cause consumer confusion, assuming that the banner ads that pop up don't falsely advertise Playboy products or photographs. He added that the Playboy case was interesting because it illustrated the way that the Internet can help companies target someone else's customers. "Outside cyberspace, we've always had purely comparative advertising -- 'My product is better than yours,'" he said. "But the Internet allows me to reach customers who are interested in my competitor's products without making a direct comparison." Banner ads keyed to certain search terms are just one means to accomplish the goal, he said. Lemley added that he was not surprised to see Playboy leading the charge on this issue. In recent years the company has challenged several Internet practices that it considers a form of piracy, including its competitors' use of the word "Playboy" in their domain names or in "meta tags," hidden code in a Web page that is designed to draw the attention of search engines. In its legal papers, Playboy said it did not object to tying a banner ad to a "neutral" search term, such as "baseball." But it claimed that a banner ad tied to another company's trademark was deceptive and unfair. Carl S. Kaplan at kaplanc@nytimes.com welcomes your comments and suggestions. Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 01:39:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Zero-Knowledge: Nothing Personal http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/17820.html In a world of ad banner targeting, cookies, and consumer "profiling," some have come to believe that total online privacy is a myth. Zero-Knowledge Systems is out to prove them wrong. The Canadian software start-up gave a demo of its Freedom 1.0, its so-called total privacy technology, on Tuesday at the Demo '99 conference in Indian Wells, California. "When you browse the Internet, your personal information is routinely collected and often distributed without your knowledge or consent," said Austin Hill, president of Montreal-based Zero-Knowledge Systems. "With Freedom, you can safely browse Internet sites, participate in public discussions, chat, and send email without revealing any of your personal information." Presently, Web users leave footprints every time they request a Web page or send an email. But by building in multiple layers of encryption and re-routing, Zero Knowledge Systems promises totally anonymous Web browsing and Net use. Freedom offers Net users a variety of pseudonyms -- online identities created for different, Internet-related tasks, such as shopping or online discussions. Users can assign each pseudonym a different email address, geographic location, and encryption key. Each alias allows a user to visit different Net sites under different identities. The privacy effect is that users can avoid profiling by Internet marketers. Public key cryptography scrambles the contents of any Internet-bound data from the user's PC, such as email, chat transmissions, and Web browsing. The crypto also hides the source and destination of Internet traffic routed through the service, which the company says will also block cookies and filter spam. Law enforcement agencies will likely find the prospect of totally untrackable Net use troublesome. The system may attract extortionists as much as it will appeal to those with a legitimate need to hide, including whistle-blowers, human-rights workers, and harassment victims. In testimony before the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on 4 February, FBI Director Louis Freeh said that strong crypto will be a boon to terrorists. "The continued widespread availability and increasing use of strong, non-recoverable encryption products will ... devastate our capabilities for fighting crime, preventing acts of terrorism, and protecting the national security." Hill built the Zero Knowledge Systems business model atop an increasingly uncertain public policy climate. Because the product uses very strong crypto, it may be subject to recently tightened global controls on crypto distribution. The Wassenaar Arrangement is expected to increase crypto restrictions in 33 countries, including Canada, the United States, and Great Britain. Any developer of super-strength cryptography, such as Zero-Knowledge, would need to obtain export licenses just as US crypto vendors do now. As a hedge, the company regularly exports the Freedom software code to an undisclosed offshore location. Should Canada's export policy on strong encryption change abruptly, Hill said he would ask his programmers to leave the country and continue development in a country free from the restrictions. Copyright 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: catfood@apk.net (Mark W. Schumann) Subject: Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA Date: 12 Feb 1999 12:14:41 -0500 Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Public Access Uni* Site Well, well, well. I seem to have caught a robocaller. An outfit calling itself "Community Development Home Services" robocalls me every few months with a sales pitch. I'm not complaining about their robo-DIALER, which is annoying but not illegal in itself; I'm saying that the first voice on the line when I answer is a recording. That's illegal under 47 USC Whatever, and I'm entitled to $500 per instance ... of which I've recorded three already. This last time I hit *69 and _actually_got_a_number_. I logged it and called the local public library for a lookup in the "criss-cross" phone directory. They turned up nothing. Likewise the Internet-based reverse lookup services failed. I needed to identify the business or a responsible person in order to bring my private action. Suing a John Doe might be satisfying, but John Doe doesn't write checks. So I called Ameritech's customer service, since the call came from Cleveland. They were able to tell me that the line was paid for on a residential account but that they were not allowed to disclose the accountholder's identity. How about that -- they say it's a privacy issue! I don't doubt the reasons for that regulation but it sure is ironic as well as annyoing in context. Anyway, I'd like to go forward with a small claims suit against these jerks. My statutory damages are $1,500, the federal law grants jurisdiction to local courts, and these calls originated and terminated in the city of Cleveland ... all of which point to jurisdiction in the Cleveland Municipal Court. (Good news: I'm 2-0 in pro se cases in that venue.) My whine and question for Telecom readers is this. What procedure short of a subpoena or discovery motion will get me the identity of my John Doe? It just occurred to me that I could wait for their next call and indicate interest in their offering. But is there a quicker way to track these bozos down? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What do you get when you call that number? If it is a residential line operating out of a residence in your town, there is the distinct possibility it is going to be answered at some time or another when you ring it. And doesn't the outgoing message give some phone number or address you can use to contact them if interested in their service? Is Community Development Home Services listed in any phone directory? What about a business directory from the Chamber of Commerce? Have you done a corporate records search with your Secretary of State? What about a city or county business license search. Do they have that name registered as a DBA? (Doing business as). If they have a post office box, you can get the name and street address of the person(s) to whom the box is listed *provided the box is registered at the post office under the category 'box is used to solicit the public'*. If the post office says the box is registered to a private person and thus exempt from having applicant information revealed, you can point out that in fact the box number is quoted in commercial advertising messages, etc. Next time they call, also listen closely to their message, get what hints you can that way. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 14:37:07 -0500 From: Lou Jahn Subject: Re: Bell Canada Replaces Operator Comments Mark J Cuccia wrote: > These contract directory companies (including Excell) are HORRIBLY out > of date in their directory listings, and have all other kinds of > erroneous or missing information. If one needs real local telco > directory, some long distance carriers (LCI/Qwest still does at this > time) still route to the real LEC directory operator of the dialed > area code. I am _NOT_ going to use these contract companies, first > paying for a directory call and only getting bogus information, and > then paying toll to use that bogus info?! and in Vol 19 Issue 9 Louis Raphael wrote: > That's rather unpalatable, considering that the information is > actually out there and available. Plus, even if the information were > up to date, a local operator would still be much better, because > they're able to handle a query like "I'm looking for a Mr. Albert > Green, somewhere in the eastern part of downtown ..." (having a fix on > the streets would likely narrow that down to only one or two > possibilities). Our firm provides access to the LSSi National Directory Assistance DB for LECs, CLECs, small IXCs and AOSPs. Mr. Rapheal is correct in that this DB soon will have over 90% of the USA listings being directly fed from RBOCs and Independent LECs. At a "Major" LEC offering 411 Coast-to-Coast the LSSi DB along with the search engine and operators have been independently measured as correctly finding callers requested listings 95% of the time. In over six months of operation not one FCC complaint has been lodged. Some European carriers are beginning to use the system for their callers; a reverse search into Europe listings will be available later this year. We now have USA and Canada in production. The second part of Mr. Raphael's comments regarding new searches and services is also totally on mark. With an average of some 30+ new NPAs per year, millions of dollars are wasted each year by callers entering the wrong NPA-555-1212. There is a major infrastructure evolution going in as LECs offering National 411 service capture hundreds of millions of LD-information dollars from IXCs! With National DA a caller does not need to even understand NPAs -- all they need is the state and hopefully the location. The National 411 service will also move millions of MOU from the preselected IXC into the LECs IXC via call completion utilization. Meanwhile even the IXCs are cannibalizing each others revenues using National DA services. Small IXCs will not only lose revenues to LEC via national 411 service, but MCI's 10-10-9000 moves both the LD-information fees and millions of MOU off of the other IXCs via their free call completion. So why aren't the IXCs fighting back? Maybe their CFOs haven't been told of the ongoing massive revenue drain. IXCs need an answer and they need it yesterday! And who said the telecom industry isn't changing? Lou Jahn ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 22:52:55 -0500 From: Brian Vita Subject: What Has Happened to AT&T/NOS Nightmare - Revisited In the week that has passed since my original post a lot has happened. After the posting I received a number of responses from other readers. Some were folks genuinely trying to help. The others were very obviously LD reps trying to pose as folks trying to help - shame on you. Over the weekend I received yet another ridiculous bill from NOS that was at least twice what my bill was before them. I've been withholding payment for the past two months and one of their reps called and demanded payment overnight for continued service. I reminded them that I had placed a dispute on the bill last month and was promised a call back from a manager. This, of course, never came. I told the rep that no payment would be forthcoming until I received an adjusted billing (which would probably indicate that they owe me money). I brought to their attention that I had been quoted $0.079/minute. They claimed it was per TCU. I produced a letter that stated "cents per minute". No answer. I've checked some other telecom news groups and virtually all of them have a NOS horror thread. I decided to go ahead with Qwest on my primary outbound and inbound lines with AT&T handling some secondary lines and lesser "800" numbers. I've had both companies unblock all of the lines so that I can do a "1010xxx" dial around with either of them on all of the lines. A very strongly worded letter was faxed and sent overnight to NOS advising them in no uncertain terms that they were no longer our LD carrier and that any failure to surrender the RESPORG status of our 800 lines immediately would have strong legal repercussions. Despite what I expected from the horror stories that I had read, they surrendered them without a wimper within 24 hours. As of this writing the changes have all taken effect and now I'm gearing up to fight NOS for the overcharges for the past 6 months. A new twist on this episode occurred this afternoon when the Bell Atlantic bill came in. It seems that although we had PIC'ed all of the lines with Bell Atlantic to NOS when they were installed in November (we moved in December), they had failed to set one of the lines up in their computer. As a result, I received a billing on the BA bill from a company called USBI. They took what should have been about $30.00 worth of calls and billed me $997.92 for them at an average rate of $2.87/minute. These were for direct dialed 1+ calls on a line that had been PIC authorized to another carrier! USBI didn't want to talk about it claiming that they were just a billing agent for Worldcom and that I had to call them. I called them and got an automated attendant that claimed I had to call my carrier "Affinity" (the carrier that I just switched to - long after these calls were made). I called USBI back and they said that they had nothing to do with the billing. I called BA back and they agreed to remove the calls from my bill. I'm just waiting for a collection company for USBI to call me. Brian Vita, President Cinema Service & Supply, Inc. 75 Walnut St. Peabody, MA 01960-5626 USA Sales & Service ->(800)231-8849 US & Canada Sales & Service Fax ->(800)329-2775 Business Office -> (978)538-7575 Business Fax -> (978)538-7550 ***Visit Our Web Site at www.cssinc.com*** Check out our new online webstore for cinema supplies! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:00:49 -0700 From: Daryl R. Gibson Subject: Re: What is a Prepaid Calling Card? TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to original posting: > and in many cases he adds on a service charge as well. Prepaid > calling cards are BAD NEWS unless your credit is so bad that not While basically, I agree with you, Wal-Mart's Sam's Club division is now selling 160 minute AT&T-branded prepaid calling cards for around 10 cents a minute ... it certainly beats either of my other calling cards Sam's Club was selling MCI/Worldcom-branded cards for 15 cents a minute until the new contract was signed a few weeks ago. Hopefully, there will be other firms that offer prepaid cards for a reasonable per-minute charge. Daryl "As you ramble through life, brother, no matter what your goal, keep your eye upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole" --Dr. Murray Banks, quoting a menu ------------------------------ From: Baris Aksoy Subject: DS3 Signalling Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 12:17:27 -0500 Organization: Alcatel Microelectronics Hello, I wonder is there any frames that can handle DS3 signals? I mean, @ DS1 signal rate we can use T1 frames. I saw somewhere that there is T3 frames. Is it only theoretical, or casn anybody use this type of frames? Actually, I expect that DS3 --> DS1 --> T1 frames a flow like that. But is it practical? Thank you all in advance for your answers. Baris ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #12 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 12 18:12:12 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA25834; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:12:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:12:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902122312.SAA25834@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #13 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Feb 99 18:12:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 13 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #168, February 1, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) Online Freedom Of Information Sparks Fears (Monty Solomon) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Peter Corlett) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (James Gifford) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Jim) Re: Bad Email from MCI (Brian A Doreste) Forwarding One Line Using Another? (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Can Arbitrary Tones be Detected With a Modem DSP? (Tinkerman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:04:21 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #168, February 1, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 168: February 1, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** JDS Fitel in US$6-Billion Merger ** CRTC Okays Bell Business ADSL Rates ** BC Tel Proposes Expanded Vancouver Free Calling Area ** MetroNet Buys Netcom ** Bell, Hydro-Quebec Outsource Telecom Management ** Union Asks CRTC to Block Bell Operator Deal ** BC Tel, Bell Offer Internet Bundles ** Alberta Wireless Users Too Quick in 780 Conversion ** GTE to Sell InfoInterActive Software ** Wes Scott Named Bell Vice-Chairman ** MTS Plan Drops Time-of-Day Overseas Rates ** Telus Edmonton Stops Supplying Primary Sets ** New CIO at MetroNet ** Northwestel Consolidates Rate Groups ** NextWave to Market Canada Payphone in BC ** BCE Results ** "Dial 'O' for Outraged" ============================================================ JDS FITEL IN US$6-BILLION MERGER: JDS Fitel of Nepean, Ont, will merge with Uniphase Corp. of San Jose, California, through an exchange of shares valued at US$6.1 Billion. The two companies, of about equal size, make fiber optic components and modules. CRTC OKAYS BELL BUSINESS ADSL RATES: CRTC Telecom Order 99- 68 approves Bell Canada's proposed rates for ADSL service to business customers. The decision rejects objections made by the Canadian Association of Internet Providers because they "relate principally to the retail Internet services provided by Bell's unregulated affiliate." http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/telecom/order/1999/o9968_0.txt BC TEL PROPOSES EXPANDED VANCOUVER FREE CALLING AREA: CRTC Public Notice 99-4 invites comments on BC Tel's proposal to introduce free calling throughout the Greater Vancouver Region by May 1, 2000. To participate, notify the Commission by February 19. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-04.htm METRONET BUYS NETCOM: MetroNet Communications has agreed to buy 51% of Netcom Canada, Canada's fifth-largest Internet Service Provider, from ICG Communications. The other 49% will be purchased by a U.S. venture capital firm, Providence Equity Partners. ** MetroNet operates fiber networks in 11 Canadian cities, and will add six more this year, giving it access to 70% of Canadian business access lines. BELL, HYDRO-QUEBEC OUTSOURCE TELECOM MANAGEMENT: Bell Canada and Hydro-Quebec have created Connexim, a new company which will manage their internal telecom networks and offer similar services to other companies in Quebec. The company begins operations with about 250 employees from Bell and a similar number from Hydro. UNION ASKS CRTC TO BLOCK BELL OPERATOR DEAL: The union that represents Bell Canada operators has asked the CRTC to order Bell to drop its plan to outsource operator services. (See Telecom Update #166) The Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union says the plan is contrary to Canadian telecom policy objectives and the public interest. BC TEL, BELL OFFER INTERNET BUNDLES: ** BC TEL has the CRTC's okay to offer Residential Additional Line Bundle, which includes a second residential access line, 120 hours of Internet access, and a SmartTouch service. Price: $40-$49/month. (Telecom Order 99-71) http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/telecom/order/1999/o9971_0.txt ** Bell Sympatico has increased hours of access for its Internet plans: $24.95 now brings 200 hours of monthly access, or 250 hours for Bell FirstRate long distance customers. ALBERTA WIRELESS USERS TOO QUICK IN 780 CONVERSION: Many Telus Mobility customers in Alberta who sought to convert cellphones on the new 780 Area Code's first day of operation January 25 lost service for up to 12 hours when paperwork fell behind. Customers have until May 18 to make the change. (See Telecom Update #165) GTE TO SELL INFOINTERACTIVE SOFTWARE: GTE will make InfoInterActive's Internet Call Manager available to its 23 million U.S. customers. WES SCOTT NAMED BELL VICE-CHAIRMAN: Bell Canada has named Wes Scott, formerly Nortel Networks CFO, as Vice-Chairman responsible for finance, human resources, strategy planning, and other fields. Nortel's new CFO is Frank Dunn. MTS PLAN DROPS TIME-OF-DAY OVERSEAS RATES: MTS First Rate customers can now call overseas for per-minute rates that do not change by time of day. Calls to the UK are 24 cents; to Japan, 64 cents. TELUS EDMONTON STOPS SUPPLYING PRIMARY SETS: Telus has CRTC approval to stop supplying phones to its Edmonton residential customers. The sale of terminal equipment by Telus-Edmonton is now deregulated. (Telecom Order 99-69) http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/telecom/order/1999/o9969_0.txt NEW CIO AT METRONET: MetroNet Communications has appointed Harold Teets, formerly MCI WorldCom's Vice-President for IT, as Senior Vice-President and Chief Information Officer. NORTHWESTEL CONSOLIDATES RATE GROUPS: CRTC Telecom Order 99- 75 approves uniform local rates across Northwestel territory as of February 1. Individual lines are $20.33 (residence) and $38.70 (business). The multiline rate is $47. ** The decision also approves a 15 cent per minute promotional rate for residential toll calling within Canada from 3pm Saturday to 8am Sunday, each weekend in 1999. ** Three Commissioners opposed the decision because it includes local rate increases for many customers. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0075.htm NEXTWAVE TO MARKET CANADA PAYPHONE IN BC: NextWave Wireless Solutions will offer Canada Payphone pay telephone and Internet terminals to location site owners in Greater Vancouver. BCE RESULTS: ** BCE reports net earnings before one-time items of $1.6 Billion in 1998, a 25% increase over 1997. Excluding Nortel, revenues rose 6% to $27.5 Billion. Despite a 7% drop in LD and network revenue, Canadian telecom earnings grew 27%. ** BCE Mobile's customer base grew 19%, but revenue increased only 3%, and profits fell to $212,000 from $71 Million. ** Bell Canada International now has almost 3 million wireless subscribers abroad. Revenues for 1998 rose 71%; losses also rose, to $66 Million. ** Nortel Networks, 42% owned by BCE, reports that 1998 sales rose 16% to US$17.6 Billion. Profit before one-time items was valued at $1.07 Billion, a 33% increase. ** CGI Group, which merged last year with Bell Sygma, reports that net earnings more than tripled in 1998 to $18.2 Million. BCE owns 43% of CGI. "DIAL 'O' FOR OUTRAGED": In the February issue of Telemanagement, available this week, Ian Angus examines how Bell Canada's decision to outsource operator services led to a "public relations disaster" and suggests that the decision may not have been in Bell's best interests. ** Also in Telemanagement #162: "Y2K in Telecom: Canadian Carriers Say They've Covered All the Bases." ** To subscribe to Telemanagement, call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225, or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:32:49 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Online Freedom Of Information Sparks Fears [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: File this under the 'What Else is Old News' category, and see my commens following the article. PAT] http://www.nytimes.com/techweb/TW_Online_Freedom_Of_Information_Sparks_Fears.html By Mary Mosquera for TechWeb, CMPnet WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Posting disaster information over the Internet from 66,000 hazardous-materials facilities could provide a road map for terrorists, some lawmakers said Wednesday. The Internet's ability to make information public and transmit it quickly and universally raises concerns among law-enforcement agencies that terrorists and criminals could use it against the communities trying to protect themselves from possible disasters. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is set to release in June worst-case scenarios, such as number of deaths and amount of damage, related to disasters at chemical facilities around the country. The Clean Air Act requires facilities that produce lethal agents, such as anthrax and sarin gas, have risk-management plans and that they be published as part of the Freedom of Information Act, so communities can prepare for emergencies. The House Commerce Committee heard emergency, law-enforcement, and government witnesses testify about the quandary of fulfilling the public-information mandate while trying to protect communities from becoming a terrorist target. Posting the sensitive information online could empower terrorists to pinpoint attacks on neighborhoods and towns," said Commerce Committee Chairman Thomas Bliley, (R-Va.), who is prepared to propose legislation to make it more difficult for terrorists to gain access to the information. The FBI believes there are legitimate law-enforcement concerns about the potential misuse of the sensitive disaster files, said Robert Burnham, the FBI's chief of the domestic terrorism section. The EPA and the FBI have proposed that the most sensitive information -- the consequence analysis of a disaster -- be separated from the overall risk-management plan, said Timothy Fields Jr., the EPA's acting assistant administrator. Although the risk-management plans will be transmitted as planned in a national database of the 66,000 facilities, the worst-case data could be available to only the affected states in a closed, secure system. That closed system could require special passwords and follow-up queries to the user. However, the problem is still there if someone who accesses the worst-case data wants to share it on the Internet. The government is also looking at developing technology for a read-only CD-ROM that will not let a file be duplicated or loaded on the Internet, Fields said. The fears of potential terrorists need to be balanced with the public's right, said Paul Orum, coordinator of the Working Group on Community Right-to-Know, a public-advocacy group. Over a 10-year period, the government recorded nearly 1 million chemical accidents. "By comparison, we don't have much information on chemical accidents caused by sabotage, let alone any examples involving the Internet," said Orum. Civil-liberties groups urged Bliley not to retreat from gains made in ensuring that citizens have access to public information. "Rather than taking advantage of the Internet's democratic potential to provide public access to this public information, these proposals view the Internet and its power to distribute information as a threat," said Ari Schwartz, policy analyst at the Center for Democracy and Technology in Washington, D.C. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Somehow they think it is a newsworthy item to say that law enforcement dislikes and is frightened by the internet. Gee, I would have never guessed that the government in general and its various law enforcement agencies in particular wanted to keep 'certain kinds of information' (actually, the more the better) off the internet, would you? . First it was child porn, then copyright issues, and now let's try guilt tripping everyone with the possibility of terrorist attacks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: abuse@verrine.demon.co.uk (Peter Corlett) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: 12 Feb 1999 20:07:41 GMT Organization: B13 C*b*l TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Larry Conzett : > [...] If I or someone was here to first use the phone to 'request > permission to play a recorded transmission' what need would I have > for the alarm system? Are you certain in Tenessee that security > alarms are not exempt from the requirement that a live person first > get permission to play a message? [...] I expect that the permission doesn't have to be granted in the same call that initiates the transmission. It would certainly make more sense this way than any daft requirement for there to be a human being present at the time of playout. I've set up my employer's computer to phone my mobile whenever various links fail. Now although this is more of a rhetorical question, being based in the UK, but would this be allowed by said law, given there'll be nobody in the office at 3am when it decides there's a fault? Peter Corlett, Moseley, Birmingham, England. Tel. +44 7050 603311 Usenet Millenium in 34 days: Will October arrive at last? ------------------------------ From: James Gifford Reply-To: gifford@ns.net Organization: Heinlein Central | CT Magazine Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 02:50:34 GMT Linc Madison wrote: > There is a California state law that forbids such calls, but, of > course, it only applies if the origin is within California. > I got a couple of such calls, from the same telemarketing outfit, > at 2:45 a.m. on Thanksgiving Day, and then at 4:45 a.m. on a Sunday. > Yes, that's a.m. as in "wee hours of the morning," between midnight > and dawn. The telco was absolutely unhelpful in giving me any way > to deal with the problem, other than trying very aggressively to > sell me Caller ID service, which I am 99.9% sure would be of no > help in identifying the caller. I've been getting them a couple of times a week, after not hearing any for years. Did a law expire somewhere? Did some other loophole open up? As far as identifying the culprit ... wouldn't listening to the message long enough to get the contact info work? | gifford@ns.net * See http://www.ns.net/~gifford for the | | Heinlein FAQ & _Robert A. Heinlein: A Reader's Companion_ | ------------------------------ From: jyoull@hotmail.com (Jim) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: 12 Feb 1999 06:39:12 GMT Plex Inphiniti wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:31:21 -0500, Michael A. Covington > wrote: >> I was under the impression that telemarketing machines that dialed you >> and played a recording, with no human operator, had been banned. Just >> now I got a call from one, an outfit called VPT that sells pagers. >> The only identifying information given was the 800 number, >> 1-800-388-2161, repeated many times. The Caller ID said only "out of >> area." > I was pretty sure those are illegal. They laws around it are I believe > a human has to initiate the call and ask you personally if they can > play a recording. I may be wrong. Sorry to be late with this comment but I guess I have relevant info. The telemarketing activity you're discussing -- calls initiated using a recording -- seems to be covered by Federal law, 47USC227 -- part of the Communications act of 1934 as currently amended -- the same law that blocks junk faxes. I am not a lawyer, I just like this law. The nice part about where this falls within the statute is that the same private right of action that applies to junk faxes also applies to telephone calls initiated with a recording. Emergency calls and "prearranged" calls are exempted of course. Automated calls are also exempted for "noncommercial purpose ... that does not include transmission of advertising". This seems to pertain mostly to calls to residential lines. Go get your $500 :) Here's the relevant segment: This is excerpted from 47USC227(b)(1): (b) RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF AUTOMATED TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT.-- (1) PROHIBITIONS.--It shall be unlawful for any person within the United States-- (A) to make any call (other than a call made for emergency purposes or made with the prior express consent of the called party) using any automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice-- (i) to any emergency telephone line (including any ''911'' line and any emergency line of a hospital, medical physician or service office, health care facility, poison control center, or fire protection or law enforcement agency); (ii) to the telephone line of any guest room or patient room of a hospital, health care facility, elderly home, or similar establishment; or (iii) to any telephone number assigned to a paging service, cellular telephone service, specialized mobile radio service, or other radio common carrier service, or any service for which the called party is charged for the call; (B) to initiate any telephone call to any residential telephone line using an artificial or prerecorded voice to deliver a message without the prior express consent of the called party, unless the call is initiated for emergency purposes or is exempted by rule or order by the Commission under paragraph (2)(B); (C) to use any telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device to send an unsolicited advertisement to a telephone facsimile machine; or (D) to use an automatic telephone dialing system in such a way that two or more telephone lines of a multi-line business are engaged simultaneously. (2) REGULATIONS; EXEMPTIONS AND OTHER PROVISIONS.--The Commission shall prescribe regulations to implement the requirements ofthis subsection. In implementing the requirements of this subsection, the Commission-- (A) shall consider prescribing regulations to allow businesses to avoid receiving calls made using an artificial or prerecorded voice to which they have not given their prior express consent; (B) may, by rule or order, exempt from the requirements of paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection, subject to such conditions as the Commission may prescribe-- (i) calls that are not made for a commercial purpose; and (ii) such classes or categories of calls made for commercial purposes as the Commission determines-- (I) will not adversely affect the privacy rights that this section is intended to protect; and (II) do not include the transmission of any unsolicited advertisement; and (C) may, by rule or order, exempt from the requirements of paragraph (1)(A)(iii) of this subsection calls to a telephone number assigned to a cellular telephone service that are not charged to the called party, subject to such conditions as the Commission may prescribe as necessary in the interest of the privacy rights this section is intended to protect. (3) PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.--A person or entity may, if otherwise permitted by the laws or rules of court of a State, bring in an appropriate court of that State-- (A) an action based on a violation of this subsection or the regulations prescribed under this subsection to enjoin such violation, (B) an action to recover for actual monetary loss from such a violation, or to receive $500 in damages for each such violation, whichever is greater, or (C) both such actions. If the court finds that the defendant willfully or knowingly violated this subsection or the regulations prescribed under this subsection, the court may, in its discretion, increase the amount of the award to an amount equal to not more than 3 times the amount available under subparagraph (B) of this paragraph. ------------------------------ From: bdoreste@copland.udel.REMOVE_THIS.edu (Brian A Doreste) Subject: Re: Bad Email from MCI Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 06:29:56 GMT Organization: University of Delaware On Tue, 09 Feb 1999 09:32:55 -0500, James Bellaire wrote: > It looks like MCI has decided to break privacy as well. > I just received an announcement from them about some change in > their website, with 21 addresses on the TO line instead of using > the BCC line. > The email was sent from and contains > the note: > ****************************************************************** > NOTE: Responses to this e-mail will not be answered. > Please send inquiries via www.mci.com/service > ****************************************************************** > At least there were only 20 other customers on the TO line - > this could have been worse. [snip] Yeah, I got this crap also ... I immediately logged onto MCI's Online Customer Service and changed my email address to 'bdoreste@127.0.0.1' Problem solved. -------------------- Want to know who has been calling you and hanging up when you answer the phone? Visit http://216.71.16.113/hangup.htm to find out. Brian A Doreste school email: bdoreste 'at' copland.udel.edu 74 E Cleveland Ave #2 work email: bdoreste 'at' mail.dot.state.de.us Newark, DE 19711-2247 USA Univ of Delaware Civil Engineering Undergraduate Usual disclaimers apply Delaware Dept of Transportation - Traffic Ops/Mgmt ------------------------------ Subject: Forwarding One Line Using Another? Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 15:35:38 GMT I have two lines (voice and fax) and on the voice line, I have two numbers (RingMate, IdentiRing, etc.). I use the second number for private calls. Bell Atlantic can forward the main voice number, but not the second number, which is really all I want. So I was thinking: Is there a simple machine that I can use to forward incoming calls on line one to a second number, using line two to do the forwarding? Joel [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A device from Radio Shack can listen to the ringing cadence on an incoming call and then send only those calls you want (identified by the ringing cadence of the second number) to a separate instrument. You put the device at the very head of the line where the line enters your premises. You plug your line into this device then take the output from it to a separate unit to be discussed in a moment. What the Radio Shack device does is (after listening to a couple of rings) take the line off hook, i.e. the call is answered, and then it in turn sends ringing voltage through the output to whatever is out there. Traditionally, that would mean a fax machine, answering machine, etc. But you get yourself a call extender device instead, and feed Radio Shack's identified (by ringing cadence) output to that call extender. The call extender sees the incoming ring and thinks it is getting an incoming call. It proceeds to do its thing and forward the call to wherever. It won't answer the incoming call until it is in a position to patch it to the party it is forwarding to. Use your fax line for the call extender's outgoing side. So, a person calls your line. If they dial the first number they get forwarded before the Radio Shack device even has a chance to deal with it. Even if you did not forward that line via telco call-forwarding the Radio Shack device would ignore it and just let it ring forever. If the calling party dials your second (or distinc- tive ring) number, the Radio Shack device notices that, and after two (or sometimes only one) of the 'distinictive rings' starts its work. The calling party hears telco ring twice (or once), hears a slight click then a totally different sounding ring, the ring back tone from the Radio Shack box. He will hear a few of these ring sounds while the Radio Shack box is nudging the call extender box trying to wake it up. The call extender will out dial to wherever and typically send a 'beep tone' to alert the answering party that a call is coming via forwarding. When it hears a human voice on the other end, it opens its front end to patch it through. On the opening of its front end, the Radio Shack device says 'well I woke him up and got him to answer me' and it in turn lets the original caller through. So you need two devices: one to identify the type of call you desire and begin handling it, and a second device to forward to wherever what the first device hands off to it. Expect that the person calling will hear six to eight rings before he gets you on the line, ie one or two while the Radio Shack device decides if this is a call for it, and another four or five of the Radio Shack-originated ringback tones while it and the call extender are communicating and the call extender is trying to get you on the line. The usual caveat-emptors apply when you allow an anonymous person on the other end access to your phone lines, but since the call extender does NOT open its front end until long past the stage where someone could seize your dial tone, you probably are pretty secure. A far easier method in my opinion is to reverse the purpose and intent of the two numbers on one line. Keep the first line -- the one that telco can forward -- as your private line, and have the distinctive ring line be the 'public' listed number. Telco will list either of them for you. Have them list the second number, with distinctive ring, and send it all the time to an answering machine whether you are home or not. There is no rule that says the distinctive ring number has to be your private one; make the first one serve that purpose instead. Now you can forward your 'personal' line to wherever and as for the distinctive (and from what you say) non-user-forwardable number, let *it* fall in an answering machine or something. An answering machine would never pick up the line anyway based on the one short ring that is sent out as part of the call forwarding process. This confused me at one point also. I had distinctive ringing and call forwarding on the same line. I would call forward my line, and callers to the first number were forwarded. When someone called the second number it was as though the call- forwarding instruction was ignored totally. It would just ring through anyway. The reason is, all outgoing calls (including the administrative command to forward calls) is associated with your first, main number. There is no way when dialing out to make the telco switch somehow think it is talking to your second number. But even then, there is an exception, but boy, is it a tricky one. Have telco put call forwarding capability on your second number. They will argue and resist and say you won't be able to use it. But you persist, having them associate that feature with your distinctive ringing number also. How do you acess it you say? Good question! The *only* way is to then use 'remote call forwarding', the feature where you dial into a 'gateway number' at the telco switch, give it your password for the number assigned to the distinctive ring, and activate it that way. I might add the only way you will ever get call forwarding cancelled on that line is via remote call forwarding also. For instance, in the Chicago-Franklin CO in downtown Chicago, to use remote call forwarding (let's say you left home, realized you forgot to forward your line and want to do it now), you dial xxx-xxxx. A voice tells you to enter your password, enter the number to be forwarded, then press *72-number or *73 to cancel forwarding on the line in question. Most folks just enter their number. You would enter your distinctive ringing number instead. By the way, I have been asked recently how to use call screening from telco across a rotary hunt group of numbers without having to purchase call screening for each line as telco tries to make you do. If your only listed number -- the only number you ever publish or give out is the fist number in the hunt group, you can get call screeing on that line only and it WILL work even if a call hunts to somewhere else. The reason is, in the CO switch, the decision to screen is made *before* the decision to hunt. If the caller is screened and sent to treatment, it will never reach the hunt group. If the caller dials direct into one of your back lines, then this won't work. Ditto having to purchase caller-id for each line in a hunt group. The decision on whether or not the information is to be passed to the called party is made *before* the decision to 'hunt him down'. Once the decision is made to pass the information, it gets sent once a line somewhere is found on which to hand the call off to you. There is nothing special about a line equipped for caller id; if the subscriber has that feature, the data gets pushed to him. For all I know, you could have a tin can and a string on one of your hunt lines. Again, this will not work if the caller dials into a back line direct. So get one caller id display unit and one of those little gimmicks from Radio Shack which takes either of two ringing lines and sends it to an answering machine in common -- only you send the output to a caller id box in common. :) It works about ninety percent of the time; the little box wakes up in time (usually by the middle of the first ring) to have gotten itself connected before the data stream starts immediatly at the end of the first ring. You may occassionally get corrupted (or no) data if the switch box is slow. I think the order in which decisions are made by the switch go like this: 1) who is this calling? let's find out. 2) now that we know who is calling, did the subscriber ever give us instructions about this caller? a) make his phone ring a special way to let him know in advance its his boss. b) get rid of the caller, our subscriber does not want to talk to him. c) no instructions either way. 3) are we supposed to tell the subscriber in advance who is calling? if so, let's get that data ready to be transmitted between the first and second ring. 4) were we told not to disturb the subscriber right now or to send his calls to some other place? where is that? 5) subscriber's line is busy, what are are we supposed to do now? we were told if line one was busy to put calls on line two automatically or line three/four, etc.) 6) okay now we are ready to hand him his call and the data that goes at the start of it ... over here is one of his lines we can use, let's send it now. There is a bit more than that, but that is the basic idea. Special features need to only be bought and paid for one time assuming all incoming calls are funneled through the lead number. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tinkerman97@usa.net (Tinkerman) Subject: Can Arbitrary Tones be Detected With a Modem DSP? Reply-To: tinkerman97@usa.net Organization: Tinkerman Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 03:05:04 GMT Hello Netfriends, I know that modems have DSP support to detect standard DATA and FAX carriers, as well as detect DTMF tones (voice modems can for sure), but is there any modem technology that can detect ANY ARBITRARY TONE with it's builtin DSP firware? I know voice modems can generate arbitrary tones, but detecting is a completely diffrerent story! Thanx for any help offered. Thanks and best regards, T-man ## Note: when Replying, please email me directly in addition to posting here, so I don't miss any responses. Don't forget to remove the "97" from my email address inserted as an anti-spam counter measure...:-) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #13 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 16 14:31:24 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA14741; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 14:31:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 14:31:24 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902161931.OAA14741@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #14 TELECOM Digest Tue, 16 Feb 99 14:30:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 14 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Fights for Control in Struggle Over Internet Access (Monty Solomon) Ticketmaster and Microsoft Settle Linking Dispute (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "I Love the Internet But I Want My Privacy Too" (Rob Slade) Telecom Update (Canada) #170, February 15, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) SS7 Release Link Trunk Info Sources? (Simon Chapman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 22:44:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Fights for Control in Struggle Over Internet Access http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/02/biztech/articles/15net.html AT&T Fights for Control in Struggle Over Internet Access By SAM HOWE VERHOVEK SEATTLE -- It is an unusual movement, one that mixes populist and free-market appeals with the high-technology abbreviations of the age, like ISP and DSL, and so far, anyway, it seems to have taken hold mostly in the well-wired cities of the Pacific Northwest. But in the legal debate over the future of Americans' high-speed connections to the Internet, some public figures clearly think they have found a potent political issue. -------------------- Larry Davis for The New York Times AT&T's acquisition of Tele-Communications Inc. is making it a cable giant. In Seattle, a worker strung new cable for the TCI system. -------------------- "This is a pipe, a pipe for critically important information, and we're simply taking the position that no one should be allowed to monopolize it," said King County Executive Ron Sims, a likely Democratic contender next year for U.S. Senate. Sims is describing cable-television lines, which can provide Internet access up to 100 times faster than what most consumers now get through conventional phone lines. On Wednesday, a committee of the County Council here voted unanimously to reject the transfer of the county cable franchise to AT&T. Members said they believed AT&T would have a monopoly on cable access to the Internet and should instead be forced to open the cable lines to other Internet service providers, much as the telecommunications giant was once required to lease its telephone lines to competing long-distance c arriers. The same condition has already been imposed by city and county officials in Portland, Ore., which recently became the first place in the nation to develop such "open access" requirements for cable lines. That move prompted a legal challenge from AT&T, and a similar fracas is expected here if the County Council votes on Tuesday to adopt its committee's recommendation. County and AT&T officials said this weekend that they hoped to reach a compromise that would leave the access issue open for future negotiation and avoid a lawsuit. The fight over access to the cable lines is taking place amid a lobbying blitzkrieg, pitting AT&T and the huge cable company it is planning to acquire, Tele-Communications Inc., known as TCI, against local phone companies and an array of Internet competitors, including America Online and dozens of smaller Internet service providers. But it is also raising a core philosophical issue, one that is already being debated in other communities around the country and that will become all the more consequential as Americans increasingly use their cable lines to connect to the Internet for work, education, shopping and entertainment. Should the cable lines, in which private companies have invested billions of dollars, be treated like public rights-of-way? To AT&T, which ultimately plans to pay for cable upgrades in nearly half the nation's homes, the notion is outrageous. In addition to suing Portland, the company has pointedly said that it can hardly move "as aggressively" to improve cable service where it may be forced to lease its lines to competitors. AT&T also points out that under its plan, cable consumers will indeed be able to connect to any Internet provider they want, though they will have to go through the company's Internet affiliate, known as At Home, to get there. In AT&T's depiction, that is hardly different from the common procedure now, in which a consumer pays the phone company for a line and pays another company, such as America Online, for content and access to the Internet. Still, in many ways, AT&T may face an uphill battle in the future to keep total control over its cable lines. For one thing, it is hard to be on the other side of a debate in which public officials are using terms like "share" and "open access" and railing against monopolies. In endorsing the rejection of AT&T's license, Jane Hague, the chairwoman of the Metropolitan King County Council budget committee, said: "Approval of the merger would place control of local cable and high-speed Internet access in the hands of one mega-company. Our proposal would protect the public from predatory pricing." For another, in acquiring or contracting with cable-television providers around the country, AT&T, which has a relatively good reputation for customer service, is now allied with some companies that consumers -- and politicians -- love to revile. Here in Seattle, for instance, TCI is already embroiled in a major dispute with both the city and the county over delays in promised improvements in cable lines and is also the subject of numerous complaints over customer service. At a public hearing before the Seattle City Council this month on how to punish the company for failing to meet its deadlines for the improvements, angry residents unloaded numerous complaints about TCI service. One man called the company "unconscionably bad, totally irresponsible, arrogant," a comment that drew sustained applause. No one doubts that cable access to the Internet is a huge and promising field, in which customers may soon be able to pull up World Wide Web pages with the ease and immediacy they now enjoy as they retrieve television channels. Roughly half a million Americans now have high-speed Internet access at home through cable or phone lines; by 2002, according to Forrester Research Inc., that number is expected to grow to 16 million, about 80 percent through cable. "It's like a fire hose as opposed to an eye dropper," said Gary Gardner, executive director of the Washington Association of Internet Service Providers (ISPs), a Seattle-based group of Internet companies around the state that want access to the cable lines. AT&T rejects the notion that it is developing any sort of monopoly on hookups to the Internet anyway. "Cable-modem technology is an attractive way of providing high-speed access, but it is by no means the only way," said Scott Morris, an AT&T vice president in charge of negotiations with Seattle officials. "The sooner At Home is deployed, the more aggressively local phone companies will roll out DSL, and the more reasonably they will price it." DSL technology, named for digital subscriber lines, is used for high-speed access over standard telephone lines. Clearly, the company has prevailed for now in hundreds of communities that have granted approval for it to take over their local cable franchises from TCI, but regulators in many of those places say they eventually want to impose "open access" rules on cable. Here in Seattle, the City Council, also due to vote on license approval Tuesday, appears ready to say yes, with the general understanding that it may negotiate access rules later. "It does absolutely no good for anybody in Seattle to have TCI and AT&T not invest money here, to have them stop because they're stuck in litigation," said Tina Podlodowski, a former Microsoft executive who is now chair of the City Council's public safety, health and technology committee, which oversees cable matters. Federal regulators have taken much the same position for now, saying they don't want to do anything that would deter companies like AT&T from upgrading cable lines. AT&T also says that even providing for "open access" would be far more complicated and expensive than opening up its long-distance lines was, a contention that other Internet companies reject. "Feasibility, schmeasibility," said Chris Miller, an employee of Mindspring, a rival Internet service provider, at the recent City Council hearing. Morris, of AT&T, said new regulations would hamper access for everybody and were unnecessary. "The whole point here is, the Internet is morphing even as we speak," he said in an interview. "Yesterday's Internet is not today's, and it certainly won't be tomorrow's." But that has not stopped hundreds of people here, in an impassioned campaign partly whipped up by AT&T's Internet competitors, from flooding city and county officials with letters and e-mail messages, imploring them to require open access for cable lines. Sims, the county executive, shared many of those e-mails, including one in rhyme: "I need to pick my own Web provider," wrote one of his constituents, "not limited by a cable service monopolizer." Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 22:42:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Ticketmaster and Microsoft Settle Linking Dispute http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/02/cyber/articles/15tick.html By BOB TEDESCHI Ticketmaster Corp. has settled its closely-watched lawsuit against the Microsoft Corp., the chief executive of Ticketmaster Online-CitySearch said Thursday, with the ticketing giant prevailing in the dispute over whether one Web site can freely link to pages deep within another site. According to Charles Conn, Ticketmaster Online's chief executive, Microsoft agreed not to link from its Sidewalk city guides to pages deep within the Ticketmaster site. Instead, the guides will point visitors interested in purchasing tickets to the ticketing service's home page. Tom Pilla, a Microsoft spokesman, said the settlement terms included a non-disclosure agreement. But Conn said that in the settlement, Microsoft "agreed not to do that kind of deep linking anymore. So they can link, but not to deep pages." The case was expected to establish a legal precedent regarding the intellectual property rights of Internet companies, as no similar lawsuit has been fully resolved in court. But as a result of the settlement, Web publishers will remain without legal guidelines on the practice of so-called "deep linking." The distinction is important, as commercial sites such as Ticketmaster Online often generate substantial revenue by selling advertising on their front pages, typically the most highly-visited pages of any site. In early 1997, Microsoft had created links from its Seattle Sidewalk site to pages within the Ticketmaster Online site, meaning that users could potentially buy tickets without even noticing that they had left the Microsoft site. Ticketmaster filed suit on April 28, 1997 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, arguing that Microsoft had "pilfered" its content and therefore diluted its value. At the time it filed suit, Ticketmaster had recently signed an agreement with CitySearch, which, like Microsoft's Sidewalk guides, provides local news and information about merchants and entertainment in various cities. Through the agreement, CitySearch essentially paid Ticketmaster for the right to do what Microsoft was doing for free. Ticketmaster's online division merged with CitySearch in September; the company is a subsidiary of USA Networks. Microsoft, meanwhile, argued that Ticketmaster's stance breached an unwritten Internet code, whereby any Web site operator has the right to link to anyone else's site. In addition, Microsoft offered a defense based on its stated First Amendement right to publish public information. The outcome of the case was eagerly awaited by Internet and First Amendment scholars, as no legal precedent existed in this area. But with the settlement, filed in court on January 22, those looking for guidance were dismayed. "I'm sure it's in the best interest of the parties, but for the purpose of providing meaningful guidance to the Internet community, this is the worst news I've heard all day," Jeffrey Kuester, an Internet law specialist and a partner in the Atlanta law firm Thomas, Kayden, Horstemeyer & Risley, said when told of the settlement. "We were hoping to hear some good, broad, general language from the court," Kuester said. "Now, do we know if deep linking is bad? Is linking to a main home page O.K.? Is it just not O.K. to link? We don't know." In the wake of the settlement, Microsoft has reverted to a policy of offering links to Ticketmaster Online's home page for Sidewalk users who want to buy tickets. According to Martin Samson, a partner with the law firm Phillips Nizer in New York, it is a "rational" outcome. "There's definitely merit to Ticketmaster's position," Samson said. "If I've got three nuggets of real value on my site, and they drive ad revenue, I should be allowed to say that you've got to come through my front door to see them." Pilla, of Microsoft, declined to comment on the case, aside from saying that the parties reached "mutually agreeable terms. But I don't know why they're talking about it, since part of the agreement was to not talk about it." One person familiar with the agreement, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the suit "ran out of steam" when Fredric Rosen sold his interest in Ticketmaster to Barry Diller, chairman and chief executive of USA Networks. "Barry Diller wasn't particularly interested in pursuing the case," the source said. "At the same time," the source said, "Microsoft's priorities with the Sidewalk sites changed. They were more of a buying guide, with less of an emphasis on editorial content like links to entertainment. So the players changed and the priorities changed, and we all basically shook hands and walked away." Meanwhile, Conn, of Ticketmaster Online-CitySearch, said the company's relationship with Microsoft "is cordial now. They're good people. We're pleased to have it behind us." ---------------------- Bob Tedeschi at tedeschi@nytimes.com welcomes your comments and suggestions. Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It seems to me the stance taken by Ticketmaster on this is very greedy. They do, after all, receive a commission on ticket sales, regardless of which direction the user comes to reach them. Now they want to insist that you have to see their advertisements first before you can spend even more money with them? Of course, the additional waiting period is required while you sit on their front page waiting for the advertisers' banners get loaded, etc. I do not understand, for the life of me, why the creators of this thing we call the World Wide Web back in the early 1990's did not obtain the neccessary legal protection for their work and place some strong and enforceable constraints on what was acceptable and what was not acceptable behavior using the standards netters had developed over the years as their guidelines. Then these *damn* companies which have moved in during the past four or five years and tried to take over the entire net as though it belonged to them, as though they invented it and the rest of us could go straight to hell would be unable to pollute things as badly as they do. There is not a day goes by I do not receive a phone call or email from some company or another wanting to put 'click-through' things in this Digest, or right on the front page of the Archives. I have told them I would list them with other sponsors on the sponsor's page in the Archives, but oh no ... they want it right up in front where users have to wade through a mine field of commercial links in the form of garish banners, etc before they ever get to the Archives itself. If it cannot be right up under your nose and stuck in your face as soon soon as you open a piece of email from me or click on the Archives then they don't want it. All to be paid at the rate of three cents per click or five cents per click. That is *NOT* what this net is about, nor what it was intended for. And that sort of thing is the reason if you want to download a simple file from the Archives you can count on it taking twice as long as it used to take. Maybe I will start playing the game along with everyone else. I'll put up a web page somewhere with some trival sort of content and then just load the page with clickers to everything I can find which will pay me three cents each. Maybe I will call it the Townson Click- through Shopping Mall or something. Just what we need on the net, eh? I am getting to the point I hate this entire net. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 08:31:39 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "I Love the Internet But I Want My Privacy Too" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKILIWMP.RVW 990110 "I Love the Internet But I Want My Privacy Too", Chris Peterson, 1998, 0-7615-1436-8, U$16.95/C$25.00 %A Chris Peterson cpeterson@aol.com %C 3875 Atherton Road, Rocklin, CA 95765-3716 %D 1998 %G 0-7615-1436-8 %I Prima Publishing %O U$16.95/C$25.00 800-632-8676 916-632-4400 fax: 916-632-1232 %O mattj@primapub.com www.primapublishing.com %P 226 p. %T "I Love the Internet But I want My Privacy Too" My wife is the office Information Wizard. Not holding a technical job, she has her finger on the pulse of what goes on and who needs to know about it. She constantly amazes not only her co-workers, but also friends and family, by her ability, given only a name, to get into contact with a person or company within mere minutes. She uses that secret and arcane source of data known to its initiates only as-- the phonebook. Very funny, you say. Well, I have a serious point to make. Three of them, actually. The first is that there is a great deal of publicly available information about you. The second is that most people do not know how to effectively use such information, and so are easily startled by someone who does. Did you know that, given your address, I can find your name and phone number? No, I don't have to use the Internet. I go to the library and look in the "Criss-Cross" directory. Which brings me to my third point: the net is not the be- all and end-all snooping tool. Chapter one rambles over a variety of topics, seemingly concentrating on the fact that some people would like information about you, and that information is available on the Web. Proprietary, and thus not public, databases are discussed in chapter two. Chapter three talks about the information you may trail through cyberspace without knowing it. However, the material has a rather suspect technical background. Besides getting the number of IP addresses wrong, the text confuses chat rooms and Usenet newsgroups, and has a description of cookies that fails at several points. In addition, the "privacy profile" exercise uses a site that has a function dealt with by another site in an unrelated domain. No mention is made of the dangers inherent in this practice. Some stories about information gathering by employers starts out chapter four, but it moves on to a miscellaneous collection of instances of personal harassment and other unpleasantness. Medical information, unrelated to the Internet, is reviewed in chapter five. Chapters six and seven both look at children on the net. The material on pornography is definitely overhyped, to the point of decrying the loss of the Communications Decency Act, but the examination of commercial abuse of children's trust is rather good. A couple of drawbacks of blocking software is mentioned, though not the hidden agendas that some have. Chapter eight looks at some technologies that assist in maintaining privacy, such as anonimizing sites and encryption. The explanations contain a large number of small errors, and ultimately don't do much ot help non-specialists understand the issues. Some US regulations regarding privacy are discussed in chapter nine, although most is unrelated to the net. An Internet extension to the US Social Service Administration is reviewed in chapter ten. More US work on regulations is mentioned in chapter eleven. While the book does discuss a number of issues of privacy related to the Internet, it does so in a ragged and often disorganized manner. Much of the content of the book has nothing to do with the Internet, and some of the material is only just short of hysteria, with little attempt at balance. Technical discussions are either missing or incorrect, and this lack of background degrades the value of the book as a whole. Overall, the level is that of a general magazine article, and is unlikely to be of significant use to the Internet using public. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKILIWMP.RVW 9901101 Free electronic distribution permitted rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Comp Sec Weekly: http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/computer_security Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 12:03:46 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #170, February 15, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 170: February 15, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** 911 Glitch Hits Payphones ** Revenue Slips at Teleglobe ** Bell Cuts FirstRate Overseas Rates ** Union Says Bell Spin-Off Illegal ** Newbridge Loses WIC LMCS Contract ** Nortel, Microcell Join in Wireless Data Venture ** Telus Mobility Upheld in Roaming Dispute ** BC Tel Provides Wireless/Landline Mailbox ** Videotron to Offer TV Internet Access ** Ottawa Seeks Comment on International Trade Law ** GlobalServe Bought by Primus ** EDS Buys SHL Systemhouse ** Alcatel to Close Montreal Plant ** Nortel to Equip Novus Local Network ** Axia NetMedia Buys Camtech ** Staples Plans Halifax Call Center ** Profits Up at Bruncor ** On-Site Workshops "Enlightening" and "Fun" ============================================================ 911 GLITCH HITS PAYPHONES: Toronto police have issued a warning regarding payphones not registered with 9-1-1 service, following an incident in which operators could not locate a Canada Payphone booth from which a 9-1-1 call had been made. MetroNet, which provides Canada Payphone's local service, blames a "software glitch," which has been fixed. REVENUE SLIPS AT TELEGLOBE: Teleglobe's fourth-quarter results, the first to include Excel Communications, show revenue of US$810 Million, a 9.4% decline from last year. Excel's revenue fell 9.7%. Excluding $262 Million in one- time charges, quarterly profit rose to $78 Million from $32 Million. BELL CUTS FIRSTRATE OVERSEAS RATES: Bell Canada's FirstRate long distance plan now offers rates to 28 overseas countries that do not change by time of day. Calls to the UK are now 22 cents/minute; to Japan, 64 cents. (See Telecom Update #168) UNION SAYS BELL SPIN-OFF ILLEGAL: The Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, which represents 2,400 Bell Canada operators, has filed a complaint with the Canada Industrial Relations Board saying that Bell cannot legally spin off the operators' jobs while their union contract is in force. Bell says its labor contracts contain no such restriction. NEWBRIDGE LOSES WIC LMCS CONTRACT: Newbridge Networks has lost most of a contract valued at about $300 Million to supply LMCS (wireless broadband) equipment to WIC Connexus. NORTEL, MICROCELL JOIN IN WIRELESS DATA VENTURE: Saraide Inc., a joint venture launched February 8, aims to provide Internet access and other information services to wireless networks, using Nortel Networks technology. Among Saraide's sponsors is Microcell, which plans to offer its services this spring. ** Nortel has agreed to pay $9.5 Million for prepaid wireless software from NBTel Global. TELUS MOBILITY UPHELD IN ROAMING DISPUTE: An Alberta court has dismissed Microcell's claim that Telus Mobility was blocking Microcell calls from roaming on Telus' analog network in Calgary, in violation of the roaming agreement between the two companies. Microcell plans to appeal. BC TEL PROVIDES WIRELESS/LANDLINE MAILBOX: BC Tel's new Combined Voice Mail lets customers receive messages to both their wireless and landline numbers in a single voice mailbox. Price: $4/month. VIDEOTRON TO OFFER TV INTERNET ACCESS: Videotron Communications plans to provide TV-based Internet access in the Montreal region this year as an add-on to its digital TV service, which is to start up this month. OTTAWA SEEKS COMMENT ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW: The Federal Government has asked for input on the "scope, content, and process" of forthcoming international trade negotiations, including those that aim to establish a Free Trade Area of the Americas. Submissions are due April 30. ** The Information Technology Association of Canada asks those who want to help formulate an ITAC response to contact Bill Munson at 905-602-8510 x223. http://www.itac.ca GLOBALSERVE BOUGHT BY PRIMUS: Primus Telecommunications of McLean, Virginia, has bought GlobalServe Communications, a Toronto-based Internet provider with 30,000 customers, for $6.5 Million. EDS BUYS SHL SYSTEMHOUSE: MCI WorldCom has sold SHL Systemhouse, the Ottawa-based systems integrator, to Electronic Data Systems for US$1.65 Billion. ALCATEL TO CLOSE MONTREAL PLANT: Alcatel plans to close its cable manufacturing factory in Montreal and consolidate operations in Pennsylvania. NORTEL TO EQUIP NOVUS LOCAL NETWORK: Novus Telecom, a Vancouver-based Competitive Local Exchange Provider (CLEC) targeting multiple dwelling units, plans to buy equipment and consulting services for US$53 Million from Nortel Networks over the next three years. AXIA NETMEDIA BUYS CAMTECH: Axia NetMedia, a Calgary-based specialist in learning systems and information exchange, has bought Camtech Communications Systems, also of Calgary, a Lucent reseller. STAPLES PLANS HALIFAX CALL CENTER: Staples, Inc. says it will hire 300 employees this year for a new call center in Halifax serving its international office supply business. PROFITS UP AT BRUNCOR: Bruncor reports fourth-quarter revenue of $152 Million, a 10.4% rise that it attributed mainly to increased sales of IT products. Net income for the year grew 14% to $57 Million. ON-SITE WORKSHOPS "ENLIGHTENING" AND "FUN": Participants have lauded Angus Dortmans' on-site workshops as "enlightening," "meaningful," "well-organized," and "fun." Workshops are available on many topics of telecom and call center management, including: ** Fundamentals of Successful Incoming Call-Center Management ** Fundamentals of Successful End-User Telecom Management ** How to Develop and Present Telecom Business Cases to Senior Management ** Recent Telecom Regulatory Decisions and Trends ** Getting More for Less: How to Improve Telecom Vendor Relations To discuss your workshop needs, call Henry Dortmans at 1-800-263-4415 ext 300. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 10:41:37 -0600 From: Simon Chapman Organization: Aethos Communication Systems Subject: SS7 Release Link Trunk Info Sources? Can anyone point me in the direction of some technical (as tekky as possible) sources of info for the use of "Release Link Trunk" as it applies to SS7 please ? I'm especially interested in how a Service Node or Adjunct Switch is told about the termination of a call and whether this is covered in the "Release Link Trunk" feature or whether this is IS-41 operation wrappers, or whatever. I have the IS-41 specs, and bunches of books, but sources such as the excellent "SS7" book by Travis Russell do not appear to have info - and in fact contradicts some of the info I have. Enquiringly, | Simon Chapman | Mobile : +1-214-213-6507 | | Aethos Communication Systems, | Office Phone : +1-214-599-1000 | | 3535 Travis St., Suite 110, | Office Fax : +1-214-599-1001 | | Dallas, TX 75204 USA | www.aethos.com | ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #14 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 16 16:45:39 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA22038; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 16:45:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 16:45:39 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902162145.QAA22038@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #15 TELECOM Digest Tue, 16 Feb 99 16:45:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 15 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Young Developer Foils Browser Filter (Monty Solomon) Telephone Collectors International Link (Paul Wills) Re: You Call, You Pay (Richard D G Cox) Re: You Call, You Pay (Tom Betz) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Richard D G Cox) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Walter Dnes) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Jim) Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings (Leonard Erickson) Re: DS-3 Signalling (Mel Beckman) Re: Ticketmaster and Microsoft Settle Linking Dispute (Barry Margolin) Re: Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA (Jim) Re: Validating the Format of an International Telephone Number (Roessler) Re: Validating the Format of an International Telephone Number (J. Levine) Re: Forwarding One Line Using Another? (David Willingham) Re: Forwarding One Line Using Another? (pastark@earl-grey.cloud9.net) Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (Bruce Wilson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 00:04:09 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Young Developer Foils Browser Filter http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,32388,00.html By Beth Lipton Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 12, 1999, 3:10 p.m. PT A 20-year-old software developer has created a way around Internet Explorer 4.0 and 5.0's content filtering feature, as he did with Netscape's browser last year. Brian Ristuccia, a computer science student at the University of Massachussetts at Lowell and an employee of Nortel Networks, in August posted instructions for disabling the NetWatch filtering feature in Netscape's Communicator 4.06. He now has done something similar with Microsoft's IE, both in its 4.0 version and in the beta version of 5.0. The filtering feature, dubbed Content Advisor, relies on Internet ratings standards set by the World Wide Web Consortium's Platform for Internet Content Selection (PICS). PICS lets Web sites rate their own content and Web browsers read those ratings. Ristuccia said he is cracking the security systems built into popular browsers because of free speech concerns. However, Content Advisor, which is listed on the browser under the "Edit" menu within "Options," is off by default and has to be activated by a user, according to a Microsoft spokesperson, who acknowledged the bypass. "In order to provide parents who have forgotten their Content Advisor password a way to continue using the feature, Microsoft created a way to recover the information, and has provided that information to certain individuals. Now an individual would like to publicize to children that they can exploit this same method to get around their parents' password, which is both regrettable (since PICS enables parents to provide a safe, useful, and enjoyable Web experience for their children) and at best a temporary workaround," Microsoft's spokesperson wrote in an email message to CNET News.com. "The software can be a dangerous tool for Internet censorship," Ristuccia said today. "Although it may have some legitimate uses, I think the risks outweigh the benefits." But Microsoft's spokesperson noted that the Content Advisor feature is "supposed to be useful for parents. It's meant to be helpful to them." Content Advisor is activated when a user clicks on it from the "Security" tab under "Options." It asks the user to set up a password and then rate the categories of Language, Nudity, Violence, and Sex based on the level of explicitness that will be allowed. Presumably, all the adults in a given household would know the password, so they could view Internet content freely. Children, who do not know the password, are blocked from viewing sites based on how violent or sexual they are, for example. Ristuccia said the feature "takes the responsibility out of [parents' and librarians'] hands and puts it into a piece of software -- and that's not a good idea." Net filtering and free speech have been contentious issues for years. Most recently, a federal court upheld a July 1996 law that prohibits any Virginia state employee from using state-owned computer equipment to access or store sexually explicit content, unless a person gets written permission from a supervisor to obtain the prohibited material. The ruling affects college professors, social workers, court clerks, and others. Last month, a California judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by an angry parent who wanted her local library to filter Internet access for all patrons after her 12-year-old son accessed pornography online at the library. Filtering technology itself has been proven less that foolproof on a number of occasions. The Microsoft spokesperson said that if Ristuccia's bypass is employed, parents will know the next time they log on because the password will have been changed. But Ristuccia argued that on his site "are two items entitled 'Toggle PICS Off' and 'Toggle PICS On' that would allow a user to enable/disable PICS without actually changing the password. It is possible to disable the Content Advisor censorware, visit restricted sites, and then turn it back on without the person who enabled Content Advisor finding out. "Also, while Microsoft may claim that the filtering software is designed to help parents, it is actually harmful to them because it provides for a false sense of security," he added. "Content Advisor blocks only a small percentage of sites that parents may find objectionable." The Microsoft spokesperson said that if the bypass causes concern among users, Microsoft "would consider creating a new workaround. The problem is that it would probably be more complicated, which means it would be more difficult for parents." For Ristuccia's part, he said he will continue to "do my best to see that none of these products are viewed as 100-percent effective." Copyright ) 1995-99 CNET, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy policy. ------------------------------ From: Paul Wills Subject: Telephone Collectors International Link Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 09:29:16 -0500 Pat, I recently took over the Telephone Collectors International web site. TCI is an association of telephone collectors, historians and general enthusiasts. Because of our special interest newsletter, Switchers Quarterly, there are also a number of people who specialize in historic telephone technology including switching equipment, trunk signalling equipment and test equipment. I would be happy to include a link on our links page and ask that you do the same on yours. http://www.voicenet.com/~tciplace Thanks, Paul Wills [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Consider it done, Paul. The next time I work on archives maintainence you will be listed. In the meantime, I hope readers will use the link included above to visit your delightful service. Why don't you add a few click-throughs at the very start of your page with some get-rich-quick advertising schemes behind them? The companies will pay you three cents each time you annoy one of your users in this way. I personally have never sold myself for three cents but you may wish to do so. For me, it would have to be a bit more than three cents. Please, dear readers, do not write and tell me what I am; everyone on the net has known for years what I am: all I do is quibble with people about the *price*. I even had one company offer to pay me ten cents per user; when a user called my URL it would redirect them to that company and when the company got finished with them, the users would be redirected back to me and the archives. How's that for having brass bedsprings? Anyway Paul, thanks for doing your part to keep the net the way it was intended. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 21:28 GMT From: Richard.Cox@Mandarin.Com (Richard D G Cox) Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Reply-To: <>@cix.co.uk In TELECOM Digest V19 #11 Monty Solomon (monty@roscom.com) wrote: > Federal telephone regulators are preparing to let wireless carriers > charge people for making calls to cellular and PCS phones, hoping > to boost competition with land-based local phone networks. If anyone thinks it will _boost_ competition, they need to think again! Experience in the UK has shown how the rates for these calls are pushed high by the operators - in fact a recent enquiry by the UK Monopolies and Mergers Commission found that rates charged for calls _to_ mobiles were considerably higher than they should have been. The Regulator is currently amending licences to require that the rates be lowered. The reason is simple ... the person who takes the decision as to which network or Service Provider to go with, normally has no reason to be bothered how much it costs to place the calls to their mobile phones. So, given the choice between a mobile with high cost to call into and a low cost to call out, or one with a low cost to call into and a high cost to call out, the decision is almost made for them. That's the way the UK tariffs have been structured: for example certain UK phones now have a tariff of 3c/minute off peak for outbound calls, but a call to that mobile phone from a UK landline at the same time of day costs 30c per minute - ten times as much. Ironically a call from the US to a UK mobile would only cost the same as a standard call to the UK, which is usually less than UK callers would pay to call the same mobile - for no other reason than the lack of any mechanism to collect the extra money. In those circumstances the networks have to accept a lower payment for calls that originate internationally. As a result some enterprising LD operators in the UK have routed their UK mobile traffic out to the USA to be refiled back ... as that works out cheaper than delivering it direct. It would not surprise me if a similar technique were used to get round any new US mobile termination rate (or at least until the loophole got plugged!) Traditionally the UK has mixed mobile and landline numbers, but one of the benefits of the number change we are about to undergo here, is that all mobile numbers will be moved into ranges (0) 77, (0) 78 and (0) 79. This will make it very easy for callers to recognise expensive numbers before they call. Will NANPA need to allocate new easy to remember NPA codes such as 1-777, for calls to caller-pays mobile phones in the USA? The only good point about the UK mobile charges is that we can safely give mobile numbers to businesses we deal with, reckoning that if they were to sell on the lists of those numbers, any telemarketers who buys such a list will tend to delete all the mobile numbers first, to avoid having to pay the higher charges. Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, PO Box 111, PENARTH UK; Phone: +44 1222 311131 If sending genuine e-mail, omit the word "Office" from our address. ------------------------------ From: tbetz@panix.com (Tom Betz) Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Date: 16 Feb 1999 13:20:14 -0500 Organization: Society for the Elimination of Junk Unsolicited Bulk Email Reply-To: tbetz@pobox.com And it's about time. This will make cellular valuable, finally. Cellular companies have been trying to compensate for "Receiver Pays" terms with "first minute free" and such like, but Caller Pays will let wireless services come into their own. We have tried ignorance | Tom Betz, Generalist for a very long time, and | Want to send me email? FIRST, READ THIS PAGE: it's time we tried education. | | YO! MY EMAIL ADDRESS IS HEAVILY SPAM-ARMORED! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 21:28 GMT From: Richard.Cox@Mandarin.Com (Richard D G Cox) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Reply-To: <>@cix.co.uk In TELECOM Digest V19 #13, jyoull@hotmail.com (Jim) quoted 47USC227(b)(1) > It shall be unlawful for any person within the United States ... to > use any telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device to send > an unsolicited advertisement to a telephone facsimile machine (snip) > (3) PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.--A person or entity may, if otherwise > permitted by the laws or rules of court of a State, bring in an > appropriate court of that State ... (snip) ... an action to recover > for actual monetary loss from such a violation, or to receive $500 > in damages for each such violation, whichever is greater From May 1st this year, similar rules will apply in the UK. Has anyone considered how (or whether) somebody receiving such a call outside the USA, which was made from the USA, could take action or collect damages? It seems to me that there might otherwise be a considerable amount of fax traffic crossing the Atlantic in each direction, in order to avoid action under each country's domestic law. Richard D G Cox Mandarin Technology, PO Box 111, PENARTH UK; Phone: +44 1222 311131 If sending genuine e-mail, omit the word "Office" from our address. ------------------------------ From: waltdnes@interlog.com (Walter Dnes) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 07:02:24 GMT Organization: Interlog Internet Services On 12 Feb 1999 20:07:41 GMT, abuse@verrine.demon.co.uk Peter Corlett) wrote: > I've set up my employer's computer to phone my mobile > whenever various links fail. Since *YOU* set it up, I presume *YOU* obtained permission from *YOURSELF* and pre-arranged this type of call. If not, *YOU* could sue *YOURSELF* for the inconvenience. Walter Dnes procmail spamfilter http://www.interlog.com/~waltdnes/spamdunk/spamdunk.htm Why a fiscal conservative opposes Toronto 2008 OWE-lympics http://www.interlog.com/~waltdnes/owe-lympics/owe-lympics.htm ------------------------------ From: jyoull@hotmail.com (Jim) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: 15 Feb 1999 19:30:09 GMT Peter Corlett wrote: > TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Larry Conzett > : >> [...] If I or someone was here to first use the phone to 'request >> permission to play a recorded transmission' what need would I have >> for the alarm system? Are you certain in Tenessee that security >> alarms are not exempt from the requirement that a live person first >> get permission to play a message? [...] > I expect that the permission doesn't have to be granted in the same > call that initiates the transmission. It would certainly make more > sense this way than any daft requirement for there to be a human > being present at the time of playout. > > I've set up my employer's computer to phone my mobile whenever > various links fail. Now although this is more of a rhetorical > question, being based in the UK, but would this be allowed by said > law, given there'll be nobody in the office at 3am when it decides > there's a fault? Per the Federal law, prearranged calls are permitted in any case ... You oughtn't have your dialer call all your neighbors' phones and ask them to wake you, without their prior consent. ------------------------------ From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Telemarketing by Playing Recordings Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 04:22:01 PST Organization: Shadownet gifford@ns.net (James Gifford) writes: > Linc Madison wrote: >> There is a California state law that forbids such calls, but, of >> course, it only applies if the origin is within California. >> I got a couple of such calls, from the same telemarketing outfit, >> at 2:45 a.m. on Thanksgiving Day, and then at 4:45 a.m. on a Sunday. >> Yes, that's a.m. as in "wee hours of the morning," between midnight >> and dawn. The telco was absolutely unhelpful in giving me any way >> to deal with the problem, other than trying very aggressively to >> sell me Caller ID service, which I am 99.9% sure would be of no >> help in identifying the caller. > I've been getting them a couple of times a week, after not hearing any > for years. Did a law expire somewhere? Did some other loophole open up? > As far as identifying the culprit ... wouldn't listening to the message > long enough to get the contact info work? Last time *I* tried that, I ran into a new trick. The recording told me that I had to answer "yes" to "Are you interested in our service" before it'd give me anymore information! I wasn't about to get into *that* can of worms and hung up. Another weirdy I had (they seem to have *finally* stopped) was getting fax calls on my voice line. I was getting the CNG tones, but I never managed to get my fax modem to synch up with their equipment. Of course, all of these things are "unavailable" (aka "out of area") Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you can truthfully answer 'yes' to the question about being interested in their service. You are interested in finding out who they are, so you can sue them! Furthermore, expressing an interest in hearing more about some topic certainly creates no legal obligation to actually purchase whatever it is they are selling. Tell them yes, you want to hear more once you have a tape recorder attached to the line. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 21:42:57 -0800 From: Mel Beckman Subject: Re: DS-3 Signalling > On Fri, 12 Feb 1999 12:17:27 Baris Aksoy com> said: > I wonder is there any frames that can handle DS3 signals? I mean, @ > DS1 signal rate we can use T1 frames. I saw somewhere that there is T3 > frames. Is it only theoretical, or casn anybody use this type of frames? > Actually, I expect that DS3 --> DS1 --> T1 frames a flow like that. But > is it practical? Baris, DS3 is widely used, and can be treated as a single 44.7ish Mbps continuous channel or as 28 individual channelized T1s. It used to be that only telcos used T3s (and T1s for that matter) -- for interconnections between COs to carry digitized voice. That's whey the DS hierarchy is all based on multiples of 64 Kbps -- it supports the 64 Kbps digitized voice channels invented by AT&T back in the 1960s. Today DS3 gets used a lot in fractional forms. You might have a full DS3 pipe to a local CO, and from there split off a 10 Mbps fraction for Frame Relay, another 10 Mbps for dedicated point-to-point, and maybe even a fraction for voice. But this kind of hard-partitioned provisioning will eventually go away, in favor of high speed packet switching protocols such as ATM or switched IP. I could go on, but perhaps this gives you some answers. Mel Beckman ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: Ticketmaster and Microsoft Settle Linking Dispute Organization: GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 19:46:27 GMT In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Monty Solomon: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It seems to me the stance taken by > Ticketmaster on this is very greedy. They do, after all, receive a > commission on ticket sales, regardless of which direction the user > comes to reach them. Now they want to insist that you have to see > their advertisements first before you can spend even more money > with them? Of course, the additional waiting period is required while > you sit on their front page waiting for the advertisers' banners > get loaded, etc. Furthermore, for a fraction of the costs of the lawsuit, they could have implemented technology to foil the deep linkers. All you have to do is look at the Referrer header that the browser sends -- if it's not a URL on your own site, redirect the query to your home page. I've noticed that www.movielink.com does this. Actually, it appears that they have some pages that can be deep-linked (www.generalcinemas.com links to them in lieu of providing its own theatre schedule pages, is presumably paying MovieFone for this privilege, and I'm able to bookmark these links) and others that cannot (if I try bookmarking them, I end up at the home page instead). Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Don't bother cc'ing followups to me. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have noticed the same kind of behavior with bookmarks established in the Real Player. If you go through certain sites to find something to listen to, then attempt to save it as a Real Player bookmark when you go back later to listen again your Real Player gets an error message. You have to go back to the site where you found the radio/TV station in the first place and then link from there instead. When the xxxxx.ram sees you coming it looks at the referer and does not see either broadcast.com or its own front page, etc and refuses to let you listen. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jyoull@hotmail.com (Jim) Subject: Re: Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA Date: 15 Feb 1999 19:30:13 GMT Mark W. Schumann wrote: > Well, well, well. I seem to have caught a robocaller. An outfit > calling itself "Community Development Home Services" robocalls me > every few months with a sales pitch. I'm not complaining about their > robo-DIALER, which is annoying but not illegal in itself; I'm saying > that the first voice on the line when I answer is a recording. That's > illegal under 47 USC Whatever, and I'm entitled to $500 per instance > ... of which I've recorded three already. > This last time I hit *69 and _actually_got_a_number_. I logged it and > called the local public library for a lookup in the "criss-cross" > phone directory. They turned up nothing. Likewise the Internet-based > reverse lookup services failed. > I needed to identify the business or a responsible person in order to > bring my private action. Suing a John Doe might be satisfying, but > John Doe doesn't write checks. > So I called Ameritech's customer service, since the call came from > Cleveland. They were able to tell me that the line was paid for on a > residential account but that they were not allowed to disclose the > accountholder's identity. How about that -- they say it's a privacy > issue! I don't doubt the reasons for that regulation but it sure is > ironic as well as annyoing in context. > Anyway, I'd like to go forward with a small claims suit against these > jerks. My statutory damages are $1,500, the federal law grants > jurisdiction to local courts, and these calls originated and > terminated in the city of Cleveland ... all of which point to > jurisdiction in the Cleveland Municipal Court. (Good news: I'm 2-0 in > pro se cases in that venue.) > My whine and question for Telecom readers is this. What procedure > short of a subpoena or discovery motion will get me the identity of my > John Doe? When you file your small claims action, you will be naming Ameritech as an additional defendant and you will subpoena their records which will reveal the information that you require. Your action will name "john does 1 through ____" and Ameritech... then once you have the real name, you amend the filing and won't have to collect from John Doe. The small claims officials should help you somewhat with the technicalities. Congratulations. Go get 'em ... the law exists so that suits like this can be filed, which will either reduce the number of offenders, or line the pockets of those who choose to fight back with the money of those who choose to abuse. Good outcome either way. Pat's searches are also going to be useful, but the telephone company's records would be useful to avoid their attempting to claim that the phone number wasn't theirs when the offending calls were placed ... Had a nice pile of faxes from a lady in the next town advertising her accounting service. She was surprised to learn that we could all come after her for $500 per fax. There is a lot of ignorance out there -- high-powered equipment in the hands of amateurs. ------------------------------ From: Georg Roessler Subject: Re: Validating the Format of an International Telephone Number Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:18:34 +0100 Organization: Bosch Telecom Reply-To: robert@bonomi.com Robert Bonomi wrote: > I'm writing some software for, in-house use, that has to cope with > international (full world-wide) telephone numbers. There is an issue > of an unacceptly high rate of various kinds of data-entry error on > non-NANP numbers -- mostly because the people doing data-entry don't > know what all the 'foreign' numbers are "supposed" to look like. Your approach will not work for telephone numbers in Germany because we use variable length phone numbers. Even numbers within the same switch and starting with the same digits can have different lengths, as I discovered recently. My private phone number is +49-69-78802639, hence in a local call you dial 8 digits to reach me. My neighbour's number has 7 digits only, something like 7812345, and the plumber I called a few days ago has two 6-digit numbers like 784321. Sorry for the bad news, Mailto: Georg.Roessler@de.bosch.com Bosch Telecom, UC-PN/EL3 Tel./Fax.: +49-69-7505-3813/-3314 60326 Frankfurt am Main In der Theorie sind Theorie und Praxis dasselbe; in der Praxis nicht Herbert Franke ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1999 19:45:12 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Validating the Format of an International Telephone Number Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Is there a compendium of this kind of information,anywhere, for the > WHOLE WORLD ?? Or, failing that, for anywhere? Most immediate need > is Mexico (non-NANP), South America (all), various W. Europe, anc > Central America. No. In Germany, for example, many PBXes have direct inward dialing with variable length numbers, so the main number might be +49-234-567-0 and extensions might be +49-234-567-2345 and +49-234-567-34567. Italy also has variable length numbers within a single city. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Date: 15 Feb 1999 03:59:10 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: we202c3f@aol.com (David Willingham) Subject: Re: Forwarding One Line Using Another? In Bellsouth territory, depending on type of C.O., you have the option of forwarding just the main number or the "Ringmaster" (distinctive ringing) numbers as well. (Option is programmed by the service rep. when you order the service.) As for the Radio Shack device, both the Hello Direct Ring Deciper unit and the Ring-Rite unit absorb the first ring to determine the proper cadence; but they do NOT answer the line then give fake ringback to the caller, rather they just channel the call to the correct device. For this reason I personally prefer these to the more common "fax-voice line sharing" devices, which do not require distinctive ringing: they answer the line and in absence of fax tone provide the fake ringback and rering voltage to the non-fax devices. The only possible drawback I can think of in Pat's suggestion to swap the 1-Ring (listed) number and the 2-ring ("private") number is that now the personal line number will be displayed on others' CID units. Of course by using a ring cadence deciphering unit, it would really not be necessary to have a separate line dedicated for the fax machine; connecting the fax as one of the distinctive ring numbers on the main line would "free up" the present fax line to be the personal line, which then could be forwarded using the basic call forwarding feature rather than the call extender box which has some loss on "trunk to trunk" conferencing, and causes billing for 2 calls if metered or toll. Another feature I like is "flexible call forwarding" which like remote call forwarding can be programmed from any touch-tone phone. It also has an audible call announce feature, which announces the name of the forwarded party. You can forward the line with this feature to another one that has an answering machine on it, and record the audible name of the person that called you. (In some ways better than caller ID because you can check remotely to see (hear) who has called.) David Willingham WE202C3F@aol.com (David Willingham) ------------------------------ From: pastark@earl-grey.cloud9.net Subject: Re: Forwarding One Line Using Another? Date: 15 Feb 1999 21:37:15 GMT Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions here! TELECOM Digest Editor noted, regarding a the Radio Shack distinctive ring device: > What the Radio Shack device does is (after listening to a couple of > rings) take the line off hook, i.e. the call is answered, and then > it in turn sends ringing voltage through the output to whatever is > out there. As it turns out, that is not entirely correct -- it does not take the line off hook, but merely redirects the ringing voltage to the appropriate output. If the device being rung does not answer, then the RS device merely keeps ringing it, without taking the line off hook. Pete pastark@cloud9.net ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1999 13:19:02 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: blw1540@aol.com (Bruce Wilson) Subject: Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer > Considering Winzip is shareware that should be paid for, this is > probably not a good idea. It's the nature of SHAREware that it can be freely copied and the copies passed around at no cost to the recipients for the software. That's got nothing to do with the issue of registration (payment) if one chooses to keep and use the software. In fact, the term "shareware" encompasses both software for which a fee is charged and that for which there's no fee ("freeware"). Bruce Wilson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #15 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 16 20:12:19 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA03115; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:12:19 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:12:19 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902170112.UAA03115@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #16 TELECOM Digest Tue, 16 Feb 99 20:12:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 16 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T-MCI Merger, According to CNET (Nevin Liber) Hallmark Computer Glitch Sends Intimate Greetings (Monty Solomon) Watching Web Speech (Monty Solomon) Employment Opportunity: Principal Software Engineer (Robertson-Surrette) Re: Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA (Derek Balling) Re: You Call, You Pay (Adam H. Kerman) Re: You Call, You Pay (John Nagle) Re: Forwarding One Line Using Another? (David Wilson) Re: Bad Email from MCI (John McHarry) Time For That Song Again! (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: nevin@CS.Arizona.EDU (Nevin Liber) Subject: AT&T-MCI Merger, According to CNET Date: 16 Feb 1999 14:00:04 -0700 Organization: University of Arizona CS Department, Tucson AZ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Instead of the occassional 'Last Laugh' item I put at the end of some issues of the Digest, this time I decided to saved the best for first. PAT] ----------------- Imagine my surprise when I got the follwing headline from CNET News Dispatch (their email service for news of the day): CNET NEWS.COM DISPATCH Tuesday, February 16, 1999 30 new stories as of 1:15 PM PT [...] TODAY'S TOP STORIES -- AT&T-MCI merger faces deadline http://www.news.com/News/Item/0%2C4%2C32441%2C00.html?dd.ne.txt.0216.02 And I thought that their upcoming merger with that cable company was a big deal... :-) This sure looks like a *human* one-byte error for once. Nevin ":-)" Liber (312) 855-1000 x199 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 00:27:19 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Hallmark Computer Glitch Sends Intimate Greetings http://www.techserver.com/noframes/story/0,2294,17514-28909-212134-0,00.html Hallmark computer glitch sends intimate online greetings into public cyberspace Copyright ) 1999 Nando Media Copyright ) 1999 Associated Press KANSAS CITY, Mo. (February 12, 1999 7:50 a.m. EST http://www.nandotimes.com) - The lovers and flirts sending e-mail Valentines and other notes on Hallmark Cards' online site no doubt intended their musings to be perused only by that special someone. Unwittingly, they had a potential audience of millions. A programming error at hallmark.com allowed anyone with a computer and some curiosity to search the Web site for private love notes - and, in many cases, the senders' name, home and e-mail addresses and place of employment. The security breach surprised customers and executives at the Kansas City-based company, which this week scrambled to modify the computer program after The Kansas City Star reported the problem. Technicians have since deleted all of the old messages. A Hallmark official said the problem involved only greetings sent a year or more ago. "It was a programming error," company spokeswoman Julie O'Dell said. "We certainly are committed to providing privacy." The recipient of a cyber Hallmark greeting card first gets an e-mail from the company, including a password. Then he or she clicks on a Web address to view the card. But until this week, all those messages were available to anyone who used the site's search engine, the newspaper reported. That means if the word "bear" was typed, for example, Hallmark's computer would have given you a list of Web pages including that word - including one page featuring a sweet message from "Teddy Bear" to his "Honey." "I had no idea," said Gary Harders of Chicago, who sent one of the cards to his wife. "I assumed it was private. "It defeats the whole purpose of sending somebody a personal card if everybody and his brother is going to get ahold of it. It could be embarrassing." O'Dell said she had no idea how many people might have clicked through the greetings. "This new system has, built in, a new standard to ensure this kind of thing doesn't happen again," she said. "We don't want a lot of people worried. None of the recent electronic greetings were in that file." According to the Star, some of the messages were obviously not meant for mass consumption. Among them: - "Gary & I have been having secret cyber sex via computer." - "I've seen you swing a sledge hammer and the way your muscles ripple ... is amazing." - "You deserve an extra foot massage tonight!" Another writer e-mailed an intimate message and a photo of a flower to a woman friend, trying to entice her into a romantic rendezvous. "You will have the greatest time you've had in 15 years," he assured his friend - unless the other man in her life persuaded her to stay home with him and their children instead. Copyright ) 1999 Nando Media ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Watching Web Speech Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 17:11:12 -0500 http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/990215/15inte.htm U.S. News 2/15/99 Watching Web speech Conflicting court decisions on pornography and abortion test the rules of the E-road BY JAMES MORROW Once considered a wild frontier, the Internet is being tamed with every passing day. Sort of. Two court decisions last week on opposite sides of the country and opposite sides of the law make clear that nobody's quite sure what the rules of the information superhighway should be. In one case, a judge ruled that Web site operators' free-speech rights had been trampled; in the other, a jury said they had gone too far. In both cases, though, the underlying question was the same: When does speech on the Internet become the cyberequivalent of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater? "The principle that emerges is that speech doesn't enjoy any special rights just because it takes place online," says Steven Shapiro, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. Agrees John Perry Barlow of the Electronic Frontier Foundation: "As people become more aware of the social space of the Internet, they will also become more aware of the need to protect it from the zealotry of those who would control it." But control is what an Oregon jury imposed when it awarded pro-choice activists and abortion doctors $107 million after finding that the operators of a Web site called The Nuremberg Files encouraged their murder. The operators are refusing to pay damages or close down the site, which lists the names and addresses of physicians who perform abortions under the heading "baby butchers." The name of Barnett Slepian, a Buffalo gynecologist, was crossed out after he was murdered last fall. In Philadelphia, meanwhile, a federal judge tossed out a law designed to block children's access to online smut. "Perhaps we do the minors of this country harm if First Amendment protections, which they will with age inherit fully, are chipped away in the name of their protection," wrote U.S. District Judge Lowell A. Reed Jr. The decision was a blow to the Clinton administration, which is considering an appeal. The 1998 Child Online Protection Act was the government's second attempt to keep minors from visiting sexually explicit commercial Web sites. (The Supreme Court struck down a 1996 law.) COPA required operators of such sites to get credit card numbers from customers to verify they were 18 or older. Experts say neither case will end with last week's rulings. The most immediate impact: Parents will keep pondering ways to keep kids from surfing the proliferating sex sites. Parry Aftab, author of A Parent's Guide to the Internet, suggests buying filters to screen out the sexy stuff. But some, like Carole Palmer of Alameda, Calif., say that's not enough: "While we want to protect our unalienable rights, we [also] owe protection to our kids." ------------------------------ From: Robertson-Surrette Subject: Employment Opportunity: Principal Software Engineer Organization: Robertson-Surrette Inc. Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 14:57:50 GMT Communications Systems Principal Software Engineer If the prospect of applying leading-edge commercial voice and data communications technology to highly reliable, ruggedized and muti-level reduncy based military products sounds challenging, read on: On behalf of one of the Ottawa region's most innovative system solutions providers, we are currently conducting a search for a Principal Engineer, Software Development. This organization has established a worldwide reputation for designing and manufacturing state-of-the-art advanced communications products. As part of an advanced development team, this individual will play a key role in defining the "next generation" of the company's leading-edge system. To be ideally suited for this role, you have a strong communications and telephony background with extensive ATM and ISDN design experience. Your network management expertise will serve you well in designing multimedia delivery capabilities using state-of-the-art technologies such as JAVA, for use in very specialized military environments. Experience with ADA Programming and/or VxWorks will be considered an assets. You possess a bachelor's degree in either Computer Science or Engineering. Having worked in the technology field for at least 7 to 8 years, you are ready for a challenging role where a small team setting fosters mentoring and learning. Here, every team member understands the difference his or her contribution makes to the product. The position requires an individual who loves to be challenged. If you, or someone you know is interested in pursuing this unique opportunity further, please contact Jim Harmon at 'jharmon@robsur.com' or by fax at (613) 749-9599. We would also welcome your call at (613) 749-9909. You can find more information about this role on our web site at 'www.robsur.com'. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 17:51:09 PST From: Derek Balling Subject: Re: Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA > This last time I hit *69 and _actually_got_a_number_. I logged it and > called the local public library for a lookup in the "criss-cross" > phone directory. They turned up nothing. Likewise the Internet-based > reverse lookup services failed. > So I called Ameritech's customer service, since the call came from > Cleveland. They were able to tell me that the line was paid for on a > residential account but that they were not allowed to disclose the > accountholder's identity. How about that -- they say it's a privacy > issue! I don't doubt the reasons for that regulation but it sure is > ironic as well as annyoing in context. Make the call on your long-distance calling card. At the end of the month, dispute the charge. Ask the customer service rep if you can get the name of the called party "to jog your memory". Frequently, they will disclose it to you in order to convince you to pay the bill. (Otherwise, most will comp it off in the name of customer service). Derek J. Balling | "Bill Gates is a monocle and a white dredd@megacity.org | fluffy cat from being a villain in the http://www.megacity.org/ | next Bond film." - Dennis Miller ------------------------------ From: ahk@chinet.chinet.com (Adam H. Kerman) Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Date: 16 Feb 1999 14:11:46 -0600 Organization: chinet In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > http://www.wired.com/news/print_version/business/story/17843.html > You Call, You Pay > Reuters > Federal telephone regulators are preparing to let wireless carriers > charge people for making calls to cellular and PCS phones, hoping to > boost competition with land-based local phone networks. . . . > But Federal Communications Commission Chairman William Kennard said > Tuesday that he had studied so-called 'calling party pays' system in > use in Europe and was ready to move forward with a similar system for > the United States. . . . > "Only 5 percent of all calls are now made on mobile phones. I think > that number would increase dramatically with a calling party pays system." Please explain. We already have "calling party pays" when a call is made from a mobile phone. Such a system would have no effect on the number of calls made from mobile phones. I have no objection to calling party pays on inbound calls to mobile phones IF a special area code is used. I have a strong objection if existing area codes are used for this service. ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Organization: ICGNetcom Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 03:02:42 GMT "Monty Solomon" writes: > http://www.wired.com/news/print_version/business/story/17843.html > You Call, You Pay Uh oh. There had better be an announcement with a rate clearly stated up front, or we're going to have ultra-high-priced cellular resellers - "your phone free, callers pay you". And what about calls to Iridium or, worse, INMARSAT phones? Those are hideously expensive. There needs to be a cap on caller-pays, maybe at $0.10/minute. John Nagle ------------------------------ From: david@uow.edu.au (David Wilson) Subject: Re: Forwarding One Line Using Another? Date: 16 Feb 99 23:31:12 GMT Organization: University of Wollongong, Australia TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman): > This confused me at one point also. I had > distinctive ringing and call forwarding on the same line. I would > call forward my line, and callers to the first number were forwarded. > When someone called the second number it was as though the call- > forwarding instruction was ignored totally. It would just ring > through anyway. The reason is, all outgoing calls (including the > administrative command to forward calls) is associated with your > first, main number. There is no way when dialing out to make the > telco switch somehow think it is talking to your second number. Here in Australia, if you have distinctive ringing, any feature you add to your primary number is also added to the second number as well. There is a prefix you add to dial out on your second number and this prefix also allows you to turn the second number's features on and off. You could have both numbers call forwarded to different locations. David Wilson School of IT & CS, Uni of Wollongong, Australia david@uow.edu.au ------------------------------ From: mcharry@erols.com (John McHarry) Subject: Re: Bad Email From MCI Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1999 01:02:22 GMT On Wed, 10 Feb 1999 06:29:56 GMT, bdoreste@copland.udel.REMOVE_THIS.edu (Brian A Doreste) wrote: > Want to know who has been calling you and hanging up when you answer the > phone? Visit http://216.71.16.113/hangup.htm to find out. It is not correct that ISDN is how this is done. CLID works fine with ISDN. Probably most of these calls come from trunks directly connected to an IXC. For any company using more than about six outgoing interexchange lines at once, which is pretty small, this is cheaper than using the local carrier. These trunks don't even have numbers. They can't get them even when they want them. Also, they are usually outgoing only since the only calls that can be routed back this way are "800" calls. The rest of the numbers belong to the LEC, which charges the IXCs big time to terminate the calls. All that being said, this is quite handy for the telescum. The suggestion that you almost always get CLID on legitimate calls is not correct either. The technology is pretty dicey, even taking into account blocking. This may vary with where you are. ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Time For That Song Again! Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 19:00:00 EST Once in a while I like to reprint articles from our archives which have, as my competitor {Reader's Digest} would say, enduring significance. Such is the case today, with this reprint from TELECOM Digest which first appeared here in Volume 3, Issue 39, dated Monday, July 18, 1983. The index line line in that issue was 'A Song of the Times'. In that issue of the Digest sixteen years ago, subscriber Lauren Weinstein lamented the death of 'Ma Bell', the old AT&T Bell System. I am, ummmm, painfully aware that a sizeable percentage of the population in the United States today was not even born and/or was too young to remember this event in our history, and thus may find some of the lyrics printed below to be mysterious. It is doubtful if anyone less than 25 years old knows much about or even cares that telecommunications = AT&T = Bell System = that's all there was until the US Department of Justice broke up the Bell System monopoly over a process of a few years that finally came to fruition in 1983. TELECOM Digest had already been around a couple of years at that point, and there were many, many articles about the divestiture both pro and con which were printed during 1982 and 1983. Lauren Weinstein was a charter member of our mailing list and is still on it today, with a handful of other readers who have subscribed since the very first issue. Occassionally, Lauren still writes to the Digest but not as much as he used to. The younger readers here -- and we have several teenagers -- may not make much sense of what follows, but to those of us who remember when Direct Distance Dialing first started, and the massive conversion of manual to automatic calling which went on during the 1950-60's era, the message which follows will bring back old memories. PAT -------------------- DO **not** USE THE OLD, OBSOLETE EMAIL ADDRESSES SHOWN BELOW TO CONTACT LAUREN OR THIS DIGEST !!! 12-Jul-83 09:14:32-PDT,4930;000000000001 Return-path: <@LBL-CSAM:vortex!lauren@LBL-CSAM> Received: from LBL-CSAM by USC-ECLB; Tue 12 Jul 83 09:12:46-PDT Date: Tuesday, 12-Jul-83 01:18:19-PDT From: Lauren Weinstein Subject: "The Day Bell System Died" Return-Path: Message-Id: <8307121614.AA17341@LBL-CSAM.ARPA> Received: by LBL-CSAM.ARPA (3.327/3.21) id AA17341; 12 Jul 83 09:14:35 PDT (Tue) To: TELECOM@ECLB Greetings. With the massive changes now taking place in the telecommunications industry, we're all being inundated with seemingly endless news items and points of information regarding the various effects now beginning to take place. However, one important element has been missing: a song! Since the great Tom Lehrer has retired from the composing world, I will now attempt to fill this void with my own light-hearted, non-serious look at a possible future of telecommunications. This work is entirely satirical, and none of its lyrics are meant to be interpreted in a non-satirical manner. The song should be sung to the tune of Don Mclean's classic "American Pie". I call my version "The Day Bell System Died"... --Lauren-- ********************************************************* *==================================* * Notice: This is a satirical work * *==================================* "The Day Bell System Died" Lyrics Copyright (C) 1983 by Lauren Weinstein (To the tune of "American Pie") (With apologies to Don McLean) ARPA: vortex!lauren@LBL-CSAM UUCP: {decvax, ihnp4, harpo, ucbvax!lbl-csam, randvax}!vortex!lauren ************************************************************* Long, long, time ago, I can still remember, When the local calls were "free". And I knew if I paid my bill, And never wished them any ill, That the phone company would let me be... But Uncle Sam said he knew better, Split 'em up, for all and ever! We'll foster competition: It's good capital-ism! I can't remember if I cried, When my phone bill first tripled in size. But something touched me deep inside, The day... Bell System... died. And we were singing... Bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? Ma Bell why did you have to die? Is your office Step by Step, Or have you gotten some Crossbar yet? Everybody used to ask... Oh, is TSPS coming soon? IDDD will be a boon! And, I hope to get a Touch-Tone phone, real soon... The color phones are really neat, And direct dialing can't be beat! My area code is "low": The prestige way to go! Oh, they just raised phone booths to a dime! Well, I suppose it's about time. I remember how the payphones chimed, The day... Bell System... died. And we were singing... Bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? Ma Bell why did you have to die? Back then we were all at one rate, Phone installs didn't cause debate, About who'd put which wire where... Installers came right out to you, No "phone stores" with their ballyhoo, And 411 was free, seemed very fair! But FCC wanted it seems, To let others skim long-distance creams, No matter 'bout the locals, They're mostly all just yokels! And so one day it came to pass, That the great Bell System did collapse, In rubble now, we all do mass, The day... Bell System... died. So bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? Ma Bell why did you have to die? I drove on out to Murray Hill, To see Bell Labs, some time to kill, But the sign there said the Labs were gone. I went back to my old CO, Where I'd had my phone lines, years ago, But it was empty, dark, and ever so forlorn... No relays pulsed, No data crooned, No MF tones did play their tunes, There wasn't a word spoken, All carrier paths were broken... And so that's how it all occurred, Microwave horns just nests for birds, Everything became so absurd, The day... Bell System... died. So bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? Ma Bell why did you have to die? We were singing: Bye, bye, Ma Bell, why did you die? We get static from Sprint and echo from MCI, "Our local calls have us in hock!" we all cry. Oh Ma Bell why did you have to die? ------------------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you again, Lauren. And to whoever is publishing this Digest fifty years from now, I hope you will see this in the archives and use it every year or so as I do, just as a reminder of how things used to be. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #16 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 17 15:48:08 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA18345; Wed, 17 Feb 1999 15:48:08 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 15:48:08 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902172048.PAA18345@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #17 TELECOM Digest Wed, 17 Feb 99 15:48:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 17 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Ticketmaster and Microsoft Settle Linking Dispute (Ed Ellers) Re: Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA (Terry Knab) Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer (Al Varney) Re: You Call, You Pay (Ralph Hyres) Re: You Call, You Pay (Michael J. Ellis) Re: You Call, You Pay (Matthew Black) Re: You Call, You Pay (Robert Wiegand) Re: You Call, You Pay (Ken McLeod) Re: DS3 Signalling (Mel Beckman) Stepper Switch Wanted (Bob Zeidman) Privacy Advocates Step up Fight Over Pentium III Chip (Monty Solomon) Last Laugh! Revenge of the Telemarketers (Monty Solomon) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Ellers Subject: Re: Ticketmaster and Microsoft Settle Linking Dispute Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 02:19:46 -0500 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions here! Barry Margolin wrote: > Furthermore, for a fraction of the costs of the lawsuit, they could > have implemented technology to foil the deep linkers. All you have to > do is look at the Referrer header that the browser sends -- if it's > not a URL on your own site, redirect the query to your home page." Ticketmaster did exactly that, directed against Sidewalk, shortly after they filed the suit; if you tried to go deep into their site from a Sidewalk link they redirected to a page saying not only that Sidewalk was violating Ticketmaster's rights but reminding users that they could access Ticketmaster directly without going to Sidewalk first! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It seems to me Ticketmaster was wrong for getting the users involved in the middle of this. They could have continued to serve the users while they were fighting with Microsoft over the issue. Web sites should *never* take their battles with other web sites to the user level. If they are so insistent on getting all the money the can from all directions then they could have simply redirected the user to their top page and let it go at that. Sites like 'sidewalk' generate enough traffic as a result of new users joining the net (via msn.com and similar large ISPs) that *anyone* they point to is going to benefit as a result. Heck, I wish 'sidewalk' had a link to the Digest/Archives, and I frankly would not care where they chose to enter. Oh, it would be nice if they came right up to the front page so my counter and stats program would capture them as I wish and so they could read whatever I had to say that day, but how could I insist on something like that? It does not look well at all for any site to bad-mouth another site in specific terms with names mentioned. If I really felt the user should be at my front door I would quietly redirect him there in a transparent way, not flash a screen at him telling how my rights were being violated. Anyway, I think for advertiser's purposes, a quality customer is one who seeks out the 'sponsor page' on his own, when he wishes to do so. That should tell the advertiser he is at least somewhat interested, and wants to read more about the product. That's a nice way to greet a customer isn't it; by sending him a message saying how your rights are being violated by him being on that page at that point in time without having jumped through your hoops to get there ... especially now that we are seeing more and more users who have been on the net for a grand total of two days or two weeks ... and they are coming on line en-masse. Please people, maybe we can try not to screw up this 'media for the people' the way CB Radio got so completely messed up as everyone started climbing on board in the early 1980's. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tknab@nyx.net (Terry Knab) Subject: Re: Mystery Robocaller and the TCPA Organization: The Home Office Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 06:19:50 GMT Derek Balling wrote: >> This last time I hit *69 and _actually_got_a_number_. I logged it and >> called the local public library for a lookup in the "criss-cross" >> phone directory. They turned up nothing. Likewise the Internet-based >> reverse lookup services failed. >> So I called Ameritech's customer service, since the call came from >> Cleveland. They were able to tell me that the line was paid for on a >> residential account but that they were not allowed to disclose the >> accountholder's identity. How about that -- they say it's a privacy >> issue! I don't doubt the reasons for that regulation but it sure is >> ironic as well as annyoing in context. > Make the call on your long-distance calling card. At the end of the month, > dispute the charge. Ask the customer service rep if you can get the name > of the called party "to jog your memory". Frequently, they will disclose > it to you in order to convince you to pay the bill. (Otherwise, most will > comp it off in the name of customer service). In Chicago, Ameritech used to offer a service that would allow a customer to call 796-xxxx (I forget the last 4 digits) and an operator would tell you the name a phone was registered to. Quite useful :) Dunno if its available elsewhere. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh yes, {312/630/708/773/847}-796-9600. Now-days it is totally automated, with a limit of two inquiries per call. It costs 75 cents per call from within any of the above area codes, and one database serves all the above areas. Dial any area code above to inquire about any number within any of them. But it is for published numbers only. Non-pubs are not available, and depending on how the entry was first put in, many times the back numbers on PBX systems are not available. With DID and Centrex numbers sometimes the response is meaningful and sometimes not. That is an *old* service, dating back to the 1920's when you got the same information by calling {specific exchange}-2080. You reached a clerk in the Chief Operator's office for that exchange who would look in a box of index cards on her desk. 'Two-oh-eight-oh' services, as they were known all eventually were merged into 312-796-9600, but you got a live person answering. It has been totally automated for many years with a synthetic voice givng all the responses. I have never heard of any telco other than Ameritech, nee Illinois Bell, nee Chicago Telephone Company which offered its CNA (Customer Name and Address) Bureau to the public. PAT] ------------------------------ From: varney@ihgp2.ih.lucent.com (Al Varney) Subject: Re: Winzip32.exe Missing From Computer Date: 16 Feb 1999 23:22:40 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies, Naperville, IL Reply-To: varney@lucent.com In article , Bruce Wilson wrote: >> Considering Winzip is shareware that should be paid for, this is >> probably not a good idea. > It's the nature of SHAREware that it can be freely copied and the > copies passed around at no cost to the recipients for the software. By that definition, Winzip is not SHAREware. You get to use it for a limited time for evaluation -- paying for it is not "optional" after that. And certainly distributing ONE .DLL from the whole set (the original request) is not permitted. Al Varney ------------------------------ From: rhyre@medplus.com (Ralph Hyres) Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 13:31:36 -0500 I object to any additional hidden 'toll' capability without a corresponding 'toll-alerting' mechanism. In Cincinnati, we have traditionally enjoyed 1+ dialing to indicate a 'toll call'. Designating special area codes is not that useful, given that certain areas in the Carribean (809?) look like 'regular' NANP numbers, but cost $3.00/minute. Cincinnati already has a 'calling party pays' system here (with Cincinnati Bell and Airtouch), which uses 1+ for toll alerting. If you leave out the 1+, you get a message giving the 'dial 1 before the number' instructions. This is the only reasonable solution with number portability. Otherwise, how would my callers know from one day to the next that calls to me are at basic LD rates (5 cents/minute) or at Cell Phone rates (99 cents/minute)? IMHO, greed is the only reason telcos won't implement useful customer services like 'toll alerting', they just want to maximize the revenue per circuit, regardless of who pays. [Alternative carriers note: this is a business opportunity for those of you emphasizing customer friendly services.] ------------------------------ From: Michael J. Ellis Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:53:13 +1100 > I have no objection to calling party pays on inbound calls to mobile phones > IF a special area code is used. I have a strong objection if existing > area codes are used for this service. That's why area code 917 was such a good idea. Until the FCC nixed it. ------------------------------ From: black@csulb.NOSMAP.edu (Matthew Black) Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Date: 17 Feb 1999 15:11:53 GMT If cellular/mobile phone companies decide to charge callers rather than subscribers, I'll probably NEVER call my friends on their cell phones. It seems very odd that the caller should pay for another user's convenience. Caller pays may attract stingy subscribers but will significantly reduce traffic (read revenue). Many business with their own PBX are likely to block cell prefixes due to the added cost per call. Some readers have expressed their approval by saying, "It's about time." What's next ... charging bus riders higher fares for all those solo auto commuters NOT riding the bus? [if you want to send me e-mail, remove obvious item from my address] -----------------------------(c) 1999 Matthew Black, all rights reserved-- matthew black | Opinions expressed herein belong to me and network & systems specialist | may not reflect those of my employer california state university | network services SSA-180E | e-mail: black at csulb dot edu 1250 bellflower boulevard | PGP fingerprint: 6D 14 36 ED 5F 34 C4 B3 long beach, ca 90840 | E9 1E F3 CB E7 65 EE BC [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually Matthew, the way it turns out is people driving automobiles -- and everyone else for that matter -- sees a certain portion of their tax money go to subsidize public transportation because very seldom are bus riders willing to put in the farebox what the ride actually costs. I think federal government regulations say that public transit companies have to meet about half of their expenses from fares collected in order to get tax subsidies to pay the rest of their expenses. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Robert Wiegand Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 03:48:42 +0000 Organization: Motorola CIG Tom Betz wrote: > And it's about time. > This will make cellular valuable, finally. Cellular companies have > been trying to compensate for "Receiver Pays" terms with "first minute > free" and such like, but Caller Pays will let wireless services come > into their own. Sorry, but I don't see how Caller Pays would make cellular more valuable. It might actually *decresase* the number of calls if people refuse to call cell phones because of the high rates. Both Owner Pays and Caller Pays systems have advantages and disadvantages and I really don't see that either is much better than the other. Regards, Bob Wiegand bwiegand@sesd.cig.mot.com ------------------------------ From: Ken McLeod Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 18:17:17 -0700 Organization: CSG Wireless I don't see the problem. I have had calling party pay on my mobiles since the early nineties here in Phoenix. Not once have I had someone complain. And business is growing. Ken McLeod ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 21:42:57 -0800 From: Mel Beckman Subject: Re: DS3 Signalling On Fri, 12 Feb 1999 12:17:27 Baris Aksoy said: > I wonder is there any frames that can handle DS3 signals? I mean, @ > DS1 signal rate we can use T1 frames. I saw somewhere that there is T3 > frames. Is it only theoretical, or casn anybody use this type of frames? > Actually, I expect that DS3 --> DS1 --> T1 frames a flow like that. But > is it practical? Baris, DS3 is widely used, and can be treated as a single 44.7ish Mbps continuous channel or as 28 individual channelized T1s. It used to be that only telcos used T3s (and T1s for that matter) -- for interconnections between COs to carry digitized voice. That's whey the DS hierarchy is all based on multiples of 64 Kbps -- it supports the 64 Kbps digitized voice channels invented by AT&T back in the 1960s. Today DS3 gets used a lot in fractional forms. You might have a full DS3 pipe to a local CO, and from there split off a 10 Mbps fraction for Frame Relay, another 10 Mbps for dedicated point-to-point, and maybe even a fraction for voice. But this kind of hard-partitioned provisioning will eventually go away, in favor of high speed packet switching protocols such as ATM or switched IP. I could go on, but perhaps this gives you some answers. Mel Beckman ------------------------------ Date: 16 Feb 1999 01:33:56 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: zeidman@aol.com (Bob Zeidman) Subject: Stepper Switch Wanted Does anyone know where I can get a stepper switch like the ones used in old telephone switching equipment? Please email me. Thanks, Bob Zeidman bob@ZeidmanConsulting.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 23:25:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Privacy Advocates Step up Fight Over Pentium III Chip http://www.techserver.com/noframes/story/0,2294,18804-30963-223635-0,00.html Copyright ) 1999 Nando Media Copyright ) 1999 Associated Press By TED BRIDIS WASHINGTON (February 15, 1999 9:38 p.m. EST http://www.nandotimes.com) - Days before the debut of the fastest computer processor the world has ever seen from Intel Corp., the chip's critics sought Monday to widen their boycott and enlist the government in opposing the new technology, which they say will allow easy tracing of Internet users. The organizers of the boycott, Junkbusters Corp. of Green Brook, N.J., and the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, sent letters to privacy and consumer groups, encouraging them to get the Federal Trade Commission involved. Intel, the world's largest computer chip-maker, announced last month that its upcoming Pentium III chip will be able to transmit a unique serial number internally and to Web sites that request it. This could be used to verify the identity of Web site users. The company said the technology will help online merchants eliminate fraud, but some privacy groups contend it gives companies unprecedented ability to trace a consumer's digital footprints as they wander the Web. The Pentium III will be launched officially Feb. 26, but the company has invited reporters and industry analysts to talk with executives about the technology Wednesday at a preview conference in San Jose, Calif. On Monday, the protest groups sent letters seeking support from the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Democracy and Technology, Center for Media Education, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Consumer Project on Technology and others active in the industry. The letters asked these groups to urge the FTC to consider stopping Intel from distributing its new technology and to warn the industry's largest computer makers expected to sell machines using the new chip. FTC Chairman Robert Pitofsky has already indicated he doesn't believe that his agency, which normally fights consumer fraud and deceptive trade practices, can require Intel to stop selling its Pentium III chips. "As things stand, I don't think we have the authority to do that," Pitofsky told The Associated Press. In a separate letter to Pitofsky, the groups warned that consumers will not participate commerce over the Internet because they fear their privacy could be compromised. The Pentium III technology "will move reality much closer to these consumers' worst fears," the groups wrote the FTC. An Intel spokesman, Chuck Mulloy, said, "They certainly have the right to write letters to anyone they want. We think we've given consumers enough choice - consumers choice and choice for the (computer makers)." After the planned boycott was announced last month, Intel officials said they will include software that allows consumers to turn off the new technology and that the company will encourage computer makers to turn it off by default in machines they sell. The privacy groups argued that some Web sites will require the technology be turned on and that some companies will mandate its use to prevent software piracy. "Experience shows that consumers will be coerced into submitting to the tracking mechanism," they wrote to the FTC. Intel has said it expects to spend $300 million worldwide promoting its new processor, which will feature 70 new built-in instructions that will boost the performance of graphics, multimedia and voice-recognition software. The company supplies roughly 85 percent of the world's computer processors and had $26.2 billion in sales last year. Copyright ) 1999 Nando Media ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 14:25:04 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Last Laugh! Revenge of the Telemarketers Phone Researcher Dials 'R' For Revenge WINNIPEG (Reuters) - A Canadian artist has struck back at people who were rude to him when he worked as a telephone marketing researcher. Les Newman of Winnipeg, Manitoba, has opened a show at a local art gallery that consists of pages and pages of telephone numbers of people who were not nice when he called to seek their opinions on various consumer products. "The show doesn't have a title. But it's subtitled, "All the phone numbers of rude a------- who tried to make me feel like s--- while I tried to make my living as a telephone market researcher in October 1998," Newman told Reuters Tuesday. The growing amount of market research and business solicitation by telephone in recent years has sparked some debate among Canadians, many of whom say they resent receiving the calls at home or at work. "People were put on the list if they would go out of their way to be particularly mean or rude," said Newman, 26. "It's an opportunity for petty revenge," he said. Newman is currently on holiday from his job. He said he was not sure he still would have a job to return to once his employer heard about his art show, set to run for the next month. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #17 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Feb 22 17:53:05 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA08489; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:53:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:53:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902222253.RAA08489@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #18 TELECOM Digest Mon, 22 Feb 99 17:53:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 18 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cyber Sleuths Have More Than Your Number (Monty Solomon) Telecom Update (Canada) #171, February 22, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) US West Glitch Deletes 5500 Users' Messages in Seattle Area (Tad Cook) Digital Data Transmission Question (Rehan Hameed) Lengthy Voice Mail Messages and Multiple Calls (srravi007@hotmail.com) Octothorp: M-W's Word of the Day (Tony Vullo) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cyber Sleuths Have More Than Your Number Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:39:39 -0500 http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/bigstory/022199/privacy.html By Andrew Alexander Cox Washington Bureau Washington -- "You're kidding!" my wife exclaimed when I told her that someone had gained access to our private bank records, lifted our account number and recorded our balance. There was more. They had also tracked our recent long-distance calls, identifying those we had telephoned by name, address and occupation. And they had compiled dossiers on us, complete with Social Security numbers, property holdings and financial dealings. "That's incredible," she said. "How can they do that?" Easily, it turns out, in the computer age. "They," I finally confessed, was actually my Cox Newspapers Washington Bureau colleague Elliot Jaspin, a Pulitzer Prize-winning high-tech wizard who had delved into our personal lives at my invitation. He was trying to come up with a way for our reporters to use computer databases to do background checks on little-known figures who suddenly break into the news, quickly learning about pending lawsuits or long-concealed arrests. Start with only my name, I suggested, and see what you can get. He hit pay dirt within a few days. Given more time -- and a little money -- he soon would have been able to obtain confidential records of my credit card purchases, salary, stocks, bonds, credit history, life insurance policy, recent air travel, whether I had ever been nailed for speeding, and even my medical records going back 10 years. While the popular notion is that a computer linked to the Internet is a key that unlocks all kinds of personal secrets, most databases on the Internet are dull as dishwater. Switchboard, for example, will allow you to instantly discover Uncle Edgar's telephone number in Dubuque. But then, calling information will get you the same thing. The Internet, however, carries ads for a burgeoning and largely uncontrolled industry of "information brokers" that -- for a fee -- will reveal the most intimate details of your life, right down to that birthmark on your backside or ancient records of psychological treatment. For fees as low as $40 per search, they will disclose non-published telephone numbers or track down the owners of private aircraft. Corporate Investigative Services of Huntsville, Ala., has a Web site that also allows you to listen to the theme music from "Mission Impossible" while you link to hundreds of other sites. Some companies, like AutoTrack, have assembled massive computerized databases containing several billion public records. Using sophisticated database software, information is quickly plucked from scores of different files, and within minutes is woven together into a report. AutoTrack files are interesting, but not nearly as revealing as companies that use what they politely term "pretexts" to shoehorn information from banks, phone companies and anyone else you may do business with. The major weapon here is a huckster's patter rather than a computer. Judging from information broker ads, everything is up for grabs. That includes the location of your safe deposit box, your bank deposits anywhere in the world, and even your bank account history, including dates and amounts of deposits, checks written or wire transfers. As privacy expert Robert Ellis Smith of Rhode Island noted, "Every fact about you is on record somewhere," and information brokers see that as fair game. Posing as a forgetful husband, telephone repairman or bank clerk, a private investigator can often get this information by outwitting low-level clerks at the phone company or some obscure branch of a major bank. There are few laws forbidding disclosure. "It's our company policy not to release any customer information without a court order or some legal document," said Sandy Arnette, a spokeswoman for Bell Atlantic in Baltimore. "But there is no state or federal law against disclosure." In fact, the House Banking Committee found only three states -- Connecticut, Illinois and Maine -- with laws making it a crime to induce an employee of a financial institution to disclose data about a customer's account. And there are no federal statutes against using "pretexts" to wangle private data from financial institutions. Rep. James A. Leach, R-Iowa, chairman of the House Banking Committee, tried unsuccessfully to get the practice outlawed last year, and he has introduced the same bill again this year. But who cares if you have a checking account in Duluth and own 40 acres of scrub land in Texas? Creditors do. Banks, who need to collect on bad credit card debts, routinely turn to lawyers who specialize in collections. And these lawyers, in turn, use information brokers to find assets they can attach. "We do a lot of credit card collection. Thousands of cases a week," said Mike Martin of Advanced Research Inc. The American Bankers Association supports Leach's proposed legislation to outlaw fraudulently obtaining information from banks. But ABA member banks "hire us to do exactly what it is they're trying to shut down," Martin said. Information brokers also will chase deadbeat dads. "Very often, it gets used for good purposes," private investigator Edmund Pankau of Houston said. "Not long ago," he recalled, his firm traced the financial dealings of a Houston man who had left his family. The information allowed them to locate the man in another city. "He had skipped out on his ex-wife," Pankau said, "but they needed to find him because his daughter needed a bone marrow transplant and he was the only one who could help." Some in the press also use information brokers to snoop. Al Schweitzer, a controversial private investigator -- he pleaded guilty in 1992 to illegally buying Social Security records -- became a legend by compiling detailed dossiers on Hollywood stars for the National Enquirer. After actor Kiefer Sutherland split from Julia Roberts, Schweitzer used her phone records to locate him at his ranch in Whitefish, Mont. He used the same method to track down Marlon Brando's daughter in Tahiti. But there is a darker side of riffling through private information. Federal officials express growing concern about "identity fraud" or "identity theft," in which a con artist uses purloined personal financial information to assume your identity, then loots your bank account or makes costly purchases with your credit card number. The extent to which Americans are actually harmed by this is unclear. A report last year by the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, suggests a startling rise in identity fraud. Trans Union, a leading credit reporting firm, told GAO that the number of inquiries about credit fraud it receives each year jumped from 35,235 in 1992 to 522,922 in 1997. Two-thirds involved identity fraud. But in the same report, GAO acknowledged that it could find "no comprehensive statistics on the prevalence of identity fraud." Pressured by the Federal Trade Commission and the threat of restrictive legislation, some large data collection firms have begun self-regulation. Several such companies represented by the Individual Reference Services Group recently agreed to abide by rules limiting unauthorized disclosure of information. But hundreds of other firms remain essentially unregulated, including the bulk of information brokers. A decade ago, only a handful existed. Today, said Evan Hendricks, editor of the Washington-based Privacy Times newsletter, there may be as many as 2,000. The explosion of the Internet and higher-powered computers means we've entered an era where "nothing is private," Pankau warned. "I can't think of anything that's private," agreed Smith, who publishes Privacy Journal, a monthly newsletter that monitors how new technology affects privacy. But the extent of actual financial harm is difficult to gauge. My wife was most troubled by the notion that someone could so easily obtain information we thought was private. Disclosure, she conceded, does not automatically mean damage. "But I would argue that just the mere unauthorized access [to private information] is one form of harm," Hendricks said, "and psychological harm is very real." ================== [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The technique called 'pretexts' as well as what some term 'social engineering' does not work as well as it used to, but sadly it still works well enough in some companies to get the information desired. One of the largest credit bureaus, Trans-Union Credit Information Corporation, takes the problem of 'social engineering' and 'pretexts' seriously enough that for a number of years its larger customers -- for example banks and credit card processing centers, or anywhere there might be several clerks working all day long doing nothing but pulling credit bureau reports for other departments, etc -- were supplied with large posters to place on walls in the office which warned about this problem. The poster showed a very stern-looking Uncle Sam, with top hat and appropriately striped trousers, etc. With a frown on his face and fingers in front of his lips the caption said, 'Please do not violate our trust in you. You are entrusted with files from the credit bureau as a specific part of your job. It is against federal law to retrieve information without a specific and legitimate reason for doing so. It is against the law to deliberatly place incorrect information in a bureau file. Both of these crimes are punishable by a fine of up to XXX dollars, or ten years imprisonment, or both, as a court of law would direct. "DO NOT BE DECEIVED by a telephone call you might receive, or a 'favor' asked of you by a co-worker! You will NEVER be contacted by the credit bureau asking you to reveal a password or information you saw in a bureau file. If a person claiming to be a superior at your company calls and tries to get you to provide this type of information you should disconnect the call and tell your supervisor immediatly. The executives at your company would never ask you to do something like that. They would go through 'channels' to obtain the information they legitimatly need from our files. "If you would like to talk to us about one of our employees at the credit bureau or about an incident which happened to you in your present employment, you can speak with us in confidence by calling 800-xxx-xxxx. No one will ever know you called, and we will take what actions are needed after our own investigation. THANK YOU FOR KEEPING THE TRUST WHICH HAS BEEN PLACED IN YOU." Across the top of the poster in larger block letters, "Uncle Sam Wants You to Keep the Trust." A most effective poster and constant reminder (Uncle Sam with pursed lips staring at you all day) that innocent looking situations could be serious problems. More and more people are getting wise to this: do not believe what you hear just because it was said on the phone; stay in control of your phone calls; never allow a phone caller to pressure you into revealing things. I am not recommending that when you get a phone call from someone you have never met before who claims to be in authority that you tell him he is full of sausage; I am just suggesting that you not be that concerned about being considered 'uncooperative' or 'antisocial'. Someone from the 'phone company' will deal with their contact person at your company, not you. Someone from the credit bureau or the computer network, etc will deal with their contact at your company, not you. And how shall I say this bluntly, yet in a form suitable for this family-rated e-journal? If you suddenly find yourself with a new girl friend or a new boy friend as happened to me many years ago when this new 'friend' discovers that you work for a large credit card processing center or the credit bureau or a large national ISP or the phone company/bank/government in a sensitive position, give careful consideration whether he wants you for your body, your wit and your charm, or if all that love-bombing, melt in your arms tenderness is intended as a way to get a bit more. Does he want to get in your pants, or does he want to get in your desk drawer at work? . Especially if he already knew about your employment before he discovered how madly in love he was with you. And before you unlock that desk drawer at work in exchange for that momentary fling, consider well what you have to gain, and what you have to lose. No matter how smart you are, there is always someone smarter who can catch you at what you did. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:43:58 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #171, February 22, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 171: February 22, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Sprint Lowers Overseas Rates ** Executive Changes at AT&T ** Bell Launches Local Winback Promotion ** Bell Nexxia Sets Start Date ** Telesat Builds Brazil Network ** Revenues, Losses Rise at Microcell ** Call-Net Posts Increased Loss ** Telus (Edmonton) Price Cap Implementation ** MTS Offers Package of U.S. Minutes ** BC Tel Mobility Tries Out Wireless Internet ** Lucent Buys Sybarus ** First Telecom to Buy Vancouver Telephone ** Clearnet Raises $100 Million ** Lucent, Nortel Announcements ** Bonus Explains Telecom's "Tips, Tricks & Traps" ============================================================ SPRINT LOWERS OVERSEAS RATES: Sprint Canada has lowered international rates on most of its long distance plans by up to 15 cents/minute. Calls to the UK are 22 cents (formerly 28 cents), to Hong Kong 24 cents (formerly 39 cents). EXECUTIVE CHANGES AT AT&T: AT&T Canada Corp. has named George Harvey, Don Morrison, and Larry Hudson as Executive Vice- Presidents leading a "smaller, more efficient executive structure." Vice-Presidents David Craig, Jack Hubley, Monty Richardson, Albert Silverman, and Andy Woyzbun have left AT&T "to pursue other opportunities." (See Telecom Update #167) BELL LAUNCHES LOCAL WINBACK PROMOTION: Bell Canada has the CRTC's OK for an offer of free installation for business line and Centrex customers returning from an alternate provider. The offer runs from February 25 to June 30. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0133.htm BELL NEXXIA SETS START DATE: Bell Nexxia says it will be operational in the second quarter and will start selling corporate services in Alberta by May. Nexxia will be headquartered in Calgary. ** Bell Nexxia has struck a five-year deal to provide network services to New York-based Prism Communication Services. Prism plans to provide high-speed Internet access, using the Nortel 1-Meg modem, in Montreal, Toronto, and several U.S. centers. TELESAT BUILDS BRAZIL NETWORK: Telesat Canada has launched a high-capacity network between three cities in aBrazil, which will supply telephone trunking and data links to local carriers and businesses. Telesat is also bidding for one of Brazil's satellite orbital slots. REVENUES, LOSSES RISE AT MICROCELL: Microcell's fourth-quarter revenue rose to $56 Million from $13.8 Million the previous year. Losses also rose, to $125 Million (last year: $92.5 Million). Microcell ended the year with 282,000 subscribers. CALL-NET POSTS INCREASED LOSS: Call-Net Enterprises, parent of Sprint Canada, reports fourth-quarter revenues of $352 Million, 40% higher than last year. Minutes billed reached 2.0 billion, a 75% increase. Call-Net's loss on the quarter was $79 Million, $3 Million higher than the previous quarter. TELUS (EDMONTON) PRICE CAP IMPLEMENTATION: CRTC Telecom Decision 99-1 sets final 1998 contribution and wireless access rates for Telus Communications in Edmonton and in Alberta as a whole and resolves other issues related to implementation of price cap regulation in Edmonton. (See Telecom Update #161) http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/02/d99-01en.htm MTS OFFERS PACKAGE OF U.S. MINUTES: Manitoba Telecom Services has introduced First Rate Freedom U.S., which offers 300 free minutes anytime to the U.S. plus unlimited off-peak calling in Canada for $39.95/month. BC TEL MOBILITY TRIES OUT WIRELESS INTERNET: BC Tel Mobility is conducting a trial of an Internet-based wireless data service provided by the Vancouver-based EDispatch.Com and running over BC Tel Mobility's CDPD wireless data network. LUCENT BUYS SYBARUS: Lucent has acquired Sybarus Technologies, an Ottawa-based semiconductor design company specializing in SONET integrated circuits. FIRST TELECOM TO BUY VANCOUVER TELEPHONE: First Telecom Corp. of Vancouver has agreed to purchase Vancouver Telephone, a reseller and equipment provider with 15,000 BC and Toronto customers. CLEARNET RAISES $100 MILLION: Clearnet Communications has raised $100 Million from a bond issue. Also, Clearnet has begun PCS service in Barrie, Ontario. LUCENT, NORTEL ANNOUNCEMENTS: During the past week: ** Lucent announced WaveStar AllMetro optical networking equipment, which will transmit locally at 400 gigabits/second. Availability: fourth quarter. ** Nortel Networks announced the Succession Network, which will enable carriers to implement unified IP networking on existing networking infrastructure. Ship date: fourth quarter. ** Nortel reported a successful trial in France of a packet-switched third-generation wireless data network transmitting at 384 Kbps. BONUS EXPLAINS TELECOM'S "TIPS, TRICKS & TRAPS": Until March 30, new subscribers to Telemanagement receive a bonus: "Tips, Tricks and Traps: Managing Business Telecom Today," by Ian Angus, Lis Angus, and Henry Dortmans. Tips, Tricks and Traps contains 22 reports on how to solve practical problems of telecom management, including: ** How to Sell Your Telecom Projects to Senior Management ** Long Distance Deals: Rates Aren't Everything ** Twelve Tips for Better RFPs ** How to Waste Money on a Consultant ** To subscribe to Telemanagement (and receive the 22 reports in Tips, Tricks and Traps) call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225 or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-ttt.html ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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. ------------------------------ Subject: US West Glitch Deletes 5500 Users' Messages in Seattle Area Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 23:42:31 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) By Helen Jung, The Seattle Times Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Feb. 18--Remember that cute guy you gave your number to? He might have called on Valentine's Day after all. But if you've got U S West voice mail, you may never know for sure. Local telephone company U S West lost thousands of phone messages for 5,500 customers in the Ballard area who use the telecommunications company's voice-mail service. Those messages include some calls made between Sunday night and 6 a.m. Monday and some old messages that customers saved. The problem stemmed from a malfunction in one of the seven drives that store messages for those customers, said U S West spokeswoman Laurie Johnson. U S West and its vendor were unable to retrieve the messages from the failed drive. The other six drives were functioning fine, she said. U S West crews installed a new drive Sunday night, she said, correctly storing incoming messages after 6 a.m. Monday. U S West will issue service credits for one month's service to customers who lost messages, Johnson said. The carrier's voice-messaging service," at $6.95 a month, is the Colorado-based company's most popular extra service, she said. But U S West didn't offer a service credit when Klaus Lendzian, a voice-mail customer, called Monday to complain about losing messages, he said. Lendzian, a Ballard resident, said he was upset that he has lost some of his messages -- some personal and some business-related -- but is angrier about U S West's response to his complaints. He learned there was a problem when he tried to retrieve his voice mail Monday and a recording alerted him that messages had been deleted. He then called the voice-mail customer-service center three or four times to find out what was going on, Lendzian said. Except for one woman, the representatives were unsympathetic, he said. Another customer, Tamara Adams, said she plans to drop U S West's service after it deleted at least one of her messages. "It bothers me a lot," she said. "I don't feel comfortable having my calls automatically deleted." U S West regrets what happened and the inconvenience to customers, said Johnson. U S West plans to install backup systems later this year to guard against lost messages. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 11:10:52 PST From: Rehan Hameed Subject: Digital Data Transmission Question Hello! I am a student of electronics engineering, I visited your chat room but no one was there so I am writing this directly to you. I am looking for a simple and cheap way to transmit digital data over a short range. I have to transmit at a rate of 32Kbps or more within a radius of 100m or so. The FSK IC's available operate at a maximum of 1200 bps. I want to avoid using any of the more advanced modulation IC's like GMSK etc. due to cost and availability factors. Please tell me if it is possible to use a simple technique like if I just use ASK using a high frequency carrier and simply transmit it, shouldn't it work? Also if I try to generate FSK by taking a VCO and setting it up to give different frequencies at 0 and 1, would it work at this rate or would it be unable to switch at such a high speed. e.g if I just take a VCO which can generate a frequency of something like 80MHz and configure at say 75MHz for 0 and 76MHz for 1, then I apply my data to it and attach its output (after ampication) to the antenna, shouldn't it work. Please reply as soon as possible. Rehan Hameed (rnhameed@yahoo.com) ------------------------------ From: sravi007@hotmail.com Subject: Lengthy Voice Mail Messages and Multiple Calls Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 08:10:33 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion Hello Everyone, I am in need of developing a foolproof system which can handle multiple people calling in to one toll free number and leaving their messages. The system should be able to handle multiple calls at the same time. And the messages can be 1 hr long. Also the voice mail software should handle the possibility of pausing while the caller who is leaving the message, can pause, and attend something more important, and come back to continuing the message. Please advice on software and hardware required. I am open to all kinds of suggestions. you can email me or post it here. Thanks, Srini ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 00:23:31 -0500 From: Tony Vullo Subject: Octothorp: M-W's Word of the Day FYI. Thought that you would enjoy Merriam-Webster's take on the octothorp. The Word of the Day for February 13 is: octothorp \AHK-tuh-thorp\ (noun) : the symbol # Example sentence: "Please enter your zip code number followed by the pound sign," instructed the voice mail recording, so I obediently punched in 0-1-1-0-2-octothorp. Did you know? Stories abound about who first called the # sign an "octothorp." Most of those tales link the name to various telephone workers in the 1960s, and all claim the "octo-" part refers to the eight points on the symbol, but the "thorp" remains a mystery. One story links it to a telephone company employee who happened to burp while talking about the symbol with co-workers. Another relates it to athlete Jim Thorpe, and a third claims it derives from an Old English form of a Danish word. If the plethora of theories leaves your head spinning, you might want to take the advice of the wag who asked (poetically), "Can we simply just say, / Ere it spoils your day, / It's the thorp between seven and nine?" Brought to you by Merriam-Webster Inc. http://www.m-w.com Visit http://www.m-w.com/service/subinst.htm to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the Word of the Day mailing list. To subscribe to the list by email, send a blank email to mw-wod-subscribe-request@listserv.webster.m-w.com. To unsubscribe via email, send a blank email to mw-wod-signoff-request@listserv.webster.m-w.com. If you have questions about your subscription, write to mw-wod-request@listserv.webster.m-w.com. Send other questions or comments about the Word of the Day to word@m-w.com. (c) 1999 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The octothorpe or 'pound sign' has been covered in this Digest in the past in some detail. I refer interested readers to these files: http://telecom-digest.org/history/octothorpe.gets.its.name http://telecom-digest.org/history/octothorpe.the.real.story The first of these files includes two issues of TELECOM Digest, Volume 8 issue 187 and Volume 8 issue 190 dated November 29 and December 1, 1988 respectively, plus a few other stray messages on the topic. The second of these files is dated November 28, 1995, about seven years to the day later with an interesting bit of history I recommend you read, and Merriam-Webster as well. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #18 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Feb 23 15:28:26 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA29332; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:28:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:28:26 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902232028.PAA29332@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #19 TELECOM Digest Tue, 23 Feb 99 15:27:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 19 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Protect Privacy, or Let Chips Fall Where They May (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "1999 Canadian Internet New User's Handbook" (Rob Slade) Ring in the Values: Old Phones are Major Collectibles (Tad Cook) AT&T Loses Appeal Over Cellular Phone Billing Suit (Monty Solomon) New Networking Pro Web Site (Mike Patterson) WE/AT&T Paint & Process (Tony Pelliccio) E911 Illinois Requirements (Wrong Number) Alternative to Telco Voice Messaging (Joseph Singer) Baudot Sequence Logic (Donald Seeley) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:30:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Protect Privacy, or Let Chips Fall Where They May http://www.bergen.com/biz/geb0222199902222.htm Monday, February 22, 1999 By ROBERT GEBELOFF It's one thing to bend the truth, to put a little spin on things. But it's another when marketers go off the deep end -- like the computer commercial where a guy buys a new PC and then uses it to order a vintage motorcycle from a Web site. Yeah, right. Or those ads for sugary breakfast cereals, where the most tooth-rotting, attention-span-numbing concoctions with sprayed-on vitamins are passed off as "part of a nutritious breakfast." Then they flash a still on the screen, showing a bowl of cereal next to a plate of bacon and eggs, a side of toast, and glasses of juice and milk. I used to wonder if all the other kids at school feasted on just such a spread each morning while my mother starved me with a solitary bowl of Raisin Bran. As recently as 1996, Kellogg's sponsored a Web site featuring cereal-box stars Snap, Crackle, and Pop, in which Snap tells children that "sweet foods can no longer be classified as bad for our teeth" because "the conditions that cause tooth decay are complex." Well, whoever devised the marketing plan for the sugary cereal industry has apparently taken a new job with Intel, the leading maker of PC processors. Intel is about to spend $300 million promoting its Pentium III chip, a slightly faster version of its predecessor, the Pentium II. The Pentium II topped out at 450 processing "cycles" per millisecond; the first Pentium IIIs are going to churn at 450 and, by summer, ship in a 550 megahertz version. That's not much of a difference. So to persuade consumers to buy PCs featuring the P-III, Intel will have to come up with another gimmick. Already, the company's Web site includes such purported benefits as more "convenient and powerful" on-line shopping, and "new ways" of surfing the Net. Essentially, Intel claims that the new chips contain a new design that allows software developers and Web site designers to include enhanced multimedia in their products, a claim that sounds strikingly similar to the supposed enhanced performance of its MMX chip. In a sneak preview last week in San Jose, Calif., Intel and the search-engine Excite showed off a three-dimensional search tool version that allows users to "glide" over kiosks that display previews of Web pages returned as part of a search. Whether this would be impossible using the Pentium II at 450 megahertz was not mentioned in most trade press accounts. So basically, Intel is going to gloss over the relative lack of performance enhancement and rely on the mass bombardment of a superficial message to sell its new chip. Sure, the chip is another step forward, but to leave consumers with the impression that they won't be able to accomplish a whole slate of tasks with a slightly less powerful chip is disingenuous. And that's not the worst of it. Intel will also inundate the airwaves and the Web with boasts about its new "security" feature. Intel is embedding a unique serial number on each chip. While serial numbers etched into the sides of most electronics devices allow the police to find your stolen stereo at the crooked pawn shop, these serial numbers can be accessed remotely by Web site operators and conceivably enable the wholesale tracking and monitoring of what individual PC owners see and read on line. Intel steadfastly denies that the serial number will be used in that manner. Yet Intel doesn't really explain how the system enhances security, either. Intel, on its Web site, claims that the boom in e-commerce is "raising PC users' concerns about the confidentiality and integrity" of on-line transactions. "Since computers are the primary connections to the Internet, they are the logical place for companies to add security features." Whether this statement is a non-sequitur or just plain doublespeak is hard to determine. It's true that users don't want hackers to intercept their credit card number. It's true that users don't want outsiders to eavesdrop on e-mail. But Intel's solution does nothing to address these real-life fears. Computer security experts predict it will be fairly easy to "spoof" serial numbers, so if Intel believes the serial number will be used to verify credit card transactions, nobody should be comforted. The price for this half-baked nod toward security is anew round of snooping by Madison Avenue, the government, and whoever else might have an interest in tracking your on-line behavior. Privacy advocates are so up-in-arms over this feature that they've called for an Intel boycott, a boycott that undoubtedly will fail because the world just can't resist the latest, even if it has the devil inside. Critics have even set up a Web site mocking Intel's famed logo: www.bigbrotherinside.com Intel has backed down slightly since announcing the new feature, agreeing to allow savvy computer users software to block Web sites from reading their serial number. Whether the average user will even be aware of this option is highly debatable. If you're comfortable with Intel's claims that the computer industry will voluntarily abide by an honor code not to abuse this feature, I can point you to the brilliant 1992 book about consumer privacy, "The Naked Consumer," in which author Erik Larson -- writing before the dawn of the Internet age -- lays out the laws of "data dynamics." Among them: Data will always be used for purposes other than originally intended; data will always be merged with complementary data to enhance its value; and, most importantly, confidential data is confidential only until somebody says it's not. This isn't paranoia; there is a full-blown direct marketing industry built on personal data, data that combines disparate sets of information -- for the right price, you can find people who subscribe to golfing magazines and spend more than $150 a week with their supermarket affinity card. It's also data that wasn't collected with the direct consent of consumers. Sure, you know that when you buy a house, your name is bound to end up on 90,000 direct marketing lists. But none of those pesky telephonic salespeople bother to show up at the closing to ask your permission. And your personal privacy is always subject to the whims of the people holding data about you. A company that collects personal data about consumers might not even think about selling the information for anything but providing good customer service -- until a marketing company stops by with a big check in hand. Studies show that most consumers don't actually care about having their privacy invaded, just so long as they get something in return -- a few cents off at the supermarket, a chance to win a sweepstakes, etc. What bears watching, however, is whether the tide of consumer sentiment will change as technology makes surveillance more pervasive. We're rapidly moving toward a society where all of our gadgets and appliances are going to be tied into The Network, fully capable of communicating and combining information about where we drive, what we eat, what we watch, and what we read on the Web. In recent weeks, I've written about the microwave oven that has an Internet connection, and the VCR that has an Internet connection, and before that, there were alarms raised over automatic toll systems, such as E-ZPass. All these devices use personal information about users to provide more customized service and convenience. But none come with any guarantees that the information won't be re-used for another purpose at some later date. Voluntary regulation, as Intel proposes for its new technology, just won't cut it in the long run, with so many devices collecting so much data about people. In an interview with {The San Jose Mercury News} last month, Vice President Al Gore restated his belief that Congress needs to enact new privacy legislation. "We need to do more to protect privacy," he said. "When you have individuals filling a prescription at the drugstore, and the information is immediately downloaded into a computer network, and then sold to the marketers of other medicines, that patient's privacy has been ravaged. And it's not fair and it's not right." For the time being, however, it's the way things are. Robert Gebeloff welcomes your questions. Send e-mail to gebeloff@bergen.com or write to: Robert Gebeloff, c/o The Record, 150 River St., Hackensack, N.J. 07601. Please include your phone number. Copyright 1999 Bergen Record Corp. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 08:28:58 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "1999 Canadian Internet New User's Handbook" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKCAINUH.RVW 990123 "1999 Canadian Internet New User's Handbook", Jim Carroll/Rick Broadhead, 1998, 0-13-974957-8, C$16.95 %A Jim Carroll jcarroll@jimcarroll.com www.jimcarroll.com %A Rick Broadhead rickb@sympatico.ca www.rickbroadhead.com %C Scarborough, Ontario %D 1998 %G 0-13-974957-8 %I Prentice Hall Canada %O C$16.95 800-576-3800 416-293-3621 www.phcanada.com %P 246 p. %T "1999 Canadian Internet New User's Handbook" As rabidly and chauvinistically patriotic as I am, I find it difficult to recommend this book. Chapter one is basically a sales pitch for the net, although, at the same time, it suggests that media hype has distorted perceptions of the Internet. The material does not address specific deceptions but does mention a few minor examples of how the net can be used. The obligatory list of Web sites is given in chapter two. Rather oddly, the specific URLs (Uniform Resource Locators) are not given in the individual writeups (and, in one case, seem to have been deliberately expunged from screen shots) although they are collected at the end of the chapter. Some items that *do* have their URLs included are the tips, but a number of those in this chapter are not Canadian. Despite the promise of the title, there is no real explanation of the net in chapter three, which simply contains a few more examples of things you can do (if you know how) as a kind of addition to chapter one. Chapter four seems to make the same commitment, but the most telling statement is the first of the "Understanding the Internet in 10 Easy Steps" at the end: "You do not need to know how the Internet works behind the scenes in order to use it." There is a minor exposition on the hierarchical naming convention of the Domain Name Service (DNS), but that is about it. Chapter five talks about getting connected to the net, but only really says to buy the right (unspecified) hardware and the right (unspecified) service. The actual connection is left as an exercise to the reader. (There is a list of Web sites of national service providers that can be very helpful--if you are already on the net and don't need it.) The Web, email, and news are introduced in chapter six--but only barely. I am glad to see that the issue of etiquette gets some space in regard to email and news, although the points are brief and relatively simple, and mailing list etiquette is not dealt with at all. Searching the Web is generally covered very badly in most books: Carroll and Broadhead at least note the difference between directories and search engines in chapter seven. Building a Web site is a serious undertaking, and chapter eight's coverage only scratches the surface. Chapter nine concludes with a quick precis of the book, and yet another iteration of chapter one (a few more things you can do on the net). Even as a quick starting guide to the net, this book does not have anywhere near the basic information of, say, "Zen and the Art of the Internet" (cf. BKZENINT.RVW), let alone the depth of understanding that the slightly longer "Internet Book" (cf. BKINTBOK.RVW) is able to provide. As for Canadian material, while there are a number of Canadian sites listed by way of example, the CRTC might have difficulty in allowing this as CanCon. I did not want to mention the self-promotional tone of the book, since to do so is to sail dangerously close to making an ad hominem attack. However, the fact that the book opens with eight pages of advertising for the authors, and closes with seven more, is one of the lesser examples. The stream of overinflated quotes of congratulatory hype (with no apparent relation to the topic at hand) and claims to specialist expertise seemingly solely on the basis that one is famous is extremely annoying, and, well, not very Canadian. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKCAINUH.RVW 990123 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Comp Sec Weekly: http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/computer_security Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Subject: Ring in the Values: Old Phones Are Major Collectibles Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 15:21:17 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) By Richard Chang NEW YORK (Reuters) - As the telephone moves toward the Internet age, with videos, headsets and all kinds of special buttons becoming the norm, more and more collectors are seeking obsolete or cute ones that remind them of simpler times. "It's probably one of the most widely used instruments of technology that we possess," said Rainbow Hirsch, owner of 20th Century Vintage Telephones in Boulder, Colo. (888-212-FONE, www.hollywoodphones.com). "More and more people are paying attention to the design, that it's durable, and a kind of cultural history that's fun to own and use." Ever since Alexander Graham Bell invented the "magneto telephone" (essentially a generator) in 1876, the voice box has evolved into candlesticks, long-distance transmitters, battery wall sets, black Art Deco desksets seen in old movies and now, Bugs Bunny, pianos, ruby red lips and Internet units. Plenty of old phones are calling for scourers at flea markets, antique fairs and Internet auction sites who, out of nostalgia, seek the finishing touch for their Art Deco living room, or want to bump up their collection of McDonald's, Superman, Peanuts, Coca-Cola or other memorabilia. The earliest phones do not come cheap. One-of-a-kind coffin-style phones -- boxes with magneto generators and gears that need to be cranked -- cost $15,000 to $20,000. These historical treasures, of course, are hard to find and appeal more to museums and serious collectors, rather than the enthusiast who wants a working instrument for home display. Candlestick and Art Deco cradle phones from the 1920s through 1940s are more common, and often usable, helping generate demand that has steadily grown and pushed prices up 100 percent over the last 10 years, says Richard Mountjoy, author of "100 Years of Bell Telephones" (Schiffer Publishing, 610-593-1777). The earliest "combined telephone" desktop sets with a turnbutton dial -- the ones in black and white movies -- are now easily worth about $400. The design was the brainchild of Henry Dreyfuss, a prominent industrial designer, who spent six years making the rounds with Western Electric phone repairmen before unveiling the classic shape in late 1936 in basic black. Colors became available the following years, and remained unchanged until 1954, when more shades were added. A red one with a fabric-wrapped cord, circa 1947, is worth about $350. Later models from the 1950s through 1970s range from $40 to $100, according to Mountjoy's price guide in his book, which was compiled in 1995. "In some cases prices have gone up 50 percent, others maybe only 20 to 30 percent, and some have doubled," he said. The design of the Dreyfuss phone evolved, but remained basically unchanged until U.S. government rulings stripped American Telephone & Telegraph of its phone equipment monopoly in 1968 and allowed rivals to enter the market. Another government antitrust suit in 1974 led to the historic 1984 settlement that spun off the seven Baby Bells. Among the earliest new designs were Mickey Mouse, Snoopy, Kermit the Frog and Winnie the Pooh produced by the Bell System in 1976. These probably cost $35-$40 at the time, but Winnie now fetches $400-$600 and Kermit $250-$300, said James David Davis of Pops Collectibles, author of Collectible Novelty Phones (Schiffer). Snoopy and Mickey are worth $50-$125 because they were more popular and are therefore now easier to find. Among the most expensive novelty phones are Superman with a cloth cape, at $1,100-$1,500 in the original box, or $200-$300 less without the box. Only about 300 of the phones were made in China for Allied Telecommunications before DC Comics Inc. put a stop to it for trademark violations in 1978. Besides, the boxes were so big that stores were reluctant to stock them, Davis said. A year later, DC Comics authorized another Superman set, with a molded plastic cape that holds the handset, manufactured for ATE Electric. This does not come any cheaper, though. Woody Woodpecker, if you can find one of the estimated 20 in the limited edition, costs $1,800 to $2,200. Novelty phones that are less rare, which you saw just last year at the store, it seems, have also shot up in price. A Pepsi-Cola Can by Tectel Inc., made in Taiwan under license in the 1980s, costs $95-$140. The Pillsbury Dough Boy phone is worth $450-$600. The Rolling Stones Tongue phone made for Tristar International Ltd. in 1983 can fetch $250-$350. But new collectors with limited budgets need not be discouraged. "Novelty phones just keep coming on and are cheap enough so that anyone can buy them," Davis said. Many recent designs can be bought for close to their original prices. The common Organ phone, circa 1992, is worth $50-60; Hot Lips (Telemania), $30-$40; See-Through (ITT Corp.), $60-$70; and Time Magazine alarm-clock phone, $15-$30. Davis predicts that a limited edition Michael Jordan phone, expected to come out in the fall, will easily be worth far more than its expected $100 price tag. Many novelty phones are cheap and poorly made. So serious collectors should keep them in the box, away from sunlight, Davis advises. And in time, they'll still ring, all the way up to the cash register. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I just recently added a new link in the Telecom Archives for people who like collecting old phones and talking about the subject with others. If you have not yet checked it out please visit http://www.voicenet.com/~tciplace for a great coll- ection of old pictures of phones and as a way to meet others with similar interests. Personally, its not my thing. If your main intended use for a phone is utilitarian -- using it as a way to communicate -- then the old ones really are bad news. The transmission quality is poor because the components used are from another era. Yes, it is fun to use them now and then (I am talking about genuine Bell stuff from the 1930-40's) but try hooking a modem in series with one of them sometime and see how far you can get. As for all the specialty phones in recent years with Mickey Mouse, etc, you can keep them. This reminds me of 'old time radio' and the abundance of tape recordings on the market in recent years of shows that were so popular in that same time period. We listen to them with their hissing and crackling noises in the background with some amusement, but would you really be happy with that sort of audio quality 24 hours per day? The people listening to radio and using the telephone in the 1930's were content with it; they had nothing better. Should we be satisfied with it today? If all you want to do is collect and trade old phones that's fine; if you want to use them, then forget it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:33:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AT&T Loses Appeal Over Cellular Phone Billing Suit By James Vicini WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Monday an appeal by an AT&T Corp. subsidiary that argued that a class-action lawsuit on behalf of its cellular phone customers should be dismissed. The justices, without any comment or dissent, let stand a ruling by a Washington state Supreme Court that reinstated a 1995 lawsuit against AT&T Wireless over its billing practices. The Supreme Court's action cleared the way for the lawsuit to go forward. The lawsuit accused AT&T Wireless of breach of contract for unlawfully "rounding up" bills to the next minute, rather than billing customers for actual airtime used. It included other state law claims of misrepresentation, fraud, and violations of the state consumer protection act on the grounds that AT&T Wireless did not adequately disclose its practice of charging customers in full-minute increments. A King County Superior Court dismissed the case in 1996 on the grounds that the federal law governing telephone carriers took precedence over state consumer protection laws. But the state Supreme Court held in September that an award of damages to consumers was not the equivalent of rate-making, which is the sole domain of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, and that the state law was not preempted. Lawyers for AT&T Wireless said the decision contravened the intent of Congress, promised increased regulatory uncertainty and will have "a profound, adverse impact on the wireless industry" if allowed to stand. "Virtually every major wireless carrier in the country has been the target of class-action lawsuits attacking how their calls are charged," they said, adding that more than 45 cases were filed seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. The lawyers cited a "patchwork of conflicting and confusing decisions" interpreting the federal law regulating wireless telecommunications services, and told the Supreme Court the Washington state case would be "ideal" to resolve the issue. Congress in 1993 amended the law, which says, "No state or local government shall have any authority to regulate the entry of or the rates charged by any commercial mobile service or any private mobile service." But the law says states were not prohibited from regulating the other terms and conditions of commercial mobile services. The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association strongly supported the appeal by AT&T Wireless. The trade group said the Washington Supreme Court decision incorrectly allowed state regulation of wireless rates and that consumers have a federal forum to redress their grievances. But Steve Berman, a lawyer for those customers who brought the lawsuit, urged the Supreme Court to deny the appeal. "The Washington Supreme Court decision simply requires AT&T to charge the rate it promised," he said. ------------------------------ From: mikepattersonSPAM@SPAMmindspring.com (Mike Patterson) Subject: New Networking Pro Web Site Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 03:21:28 GMT Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Reply-To: mikepattersonSPAM@SPAMmindspring.com Are you a networking professional? Know LAN, WAN, protocols, hardware, routers, switches, firewalls, etc.? * I NEED YOUR HELP! * I am building what I hope will become "The Mother Of All Networking Sites". I want this to be the page that network pros set up as their "start page" because it's so useful. I want this to be a sort of information clearing house for anyone who's into networks. Why? Because I've spent too much time searching the web for answers that I KNOW are out there, but aren't easy to locate. I want to set up a site where I (or anyone else in the business) can go to have a reasonably good chance of finding what they want on the first pass. I plan to have several sections: - ONLINE LINKS TO: telecommunications equipment manufacturers carriers professional services providers technical training resources technical white papers and articles trade ezines, magazines, etc. - CLASSIFIED ADS - JOB LISTINGS - BBS and/or CHAT Please take a look, make a suggestion or comment. I'm just getting this thing started, so be gentle! http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Circuit/2026/ Oh, and if it's already been done, please let me know! Mike Patterson Ph:770-993-5010 Senior Consultant Ext: 729 Internetworking Practice DID:770.645.7729 Predictive Systems www.predictive.com 20 Mansell Court Suite 200 SPAMmike.patterson@SPAMpredictive.com Roswell, GA 30076 con?sult'ant n. 1. one who gives professional or technical advice 2. mental prostitute [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well Mike, there are 'start pages' galore on the web these days. The idea of putting up a web page with a humongous number of links going in all directions -- a sort of one size fits all approach -- has been tried and is still a very common thing. Be prepared for a constant battle keeping the links all up to date. Go a month or so without checking your work and you will find a half-dozen that lead to a 404-type response. I do not want to sound disparaging, but unless you are really into web page design and have a lot of time to spend on the maintainence of the page itself -- as opposed to actually *using* the page -- I would not recommend this. I would leave the searching and linking to the professional search engine/link-making people. By my publi- cation of your request, I suspect you will receive lots of email asking you to add links to your page, which you will spend time entering only to never use again. You'll receive requests to make links to all sorts of vested interests disguised as important links for telecom professionals, etc. One thing I personally do not like is having my browsers start making an outgoing phone call before I have decided what I want to do. If your browser start page is on someone else's site then that always happens. My personal preference is to have a small, fairly simple start page of my own, on my own computer, with links also on my own computer to the templates of several search engines. I click on my own links, bring up the template of the search engine I wish to use, fill in the blanks, and then make the phone call. So while those folks who let Microsoft or Netscape or Infoseek or whoever provide their start pages, replete with advertising and graphics that make the start up itself into a long affair, I get to look at clouds.bmp and listen to pictures.mid while I fill in the blanks on a template I designed. The best searching script I have found is one that accepts your query then goes out and 'splashes' it to several search engines at the same time, gathers up the results from all of them, tries to eliminate duplicates, presents the consolidated search results on your screen allowing you to pick and choose those you want to read in detail. In the meantime I look at the .bmp of my choice in the background and listen to the .mid of my choice, preferably something of Handel or Bach. One such script which uses the 'splash/gather/ consolidate' approach -- calling on five or six of the major search engines all at once to gather up what they have and send it back -- is 'Infoseek Express'. When you get that script, just tweak it up a bit, getting rid of their ugly advertisements and all the non- sensical categories in which you would have no interest whatsoever, add the .bmp and .mid files of your choice and use that as your personal search engine instead. That way, they do the searching and linking while I do the viewing and listening. And Infoseek Express has one other good feature: while you are viewing one page of the consolidated results, it is busy pre-loading more pages for you on your own computer, so there is no waiting. I wonder if there would be a need on the net today for such a product ... goddess knows there are enough garish, ugly and time- wasting 'start pages' available for the newbies to pick from. One that queried six or eight engines at once, and accidentally dropped all their advertising and cookies in the bit bucket on the way back with the results nicely presented in a font that was transparent on a background of clouds.bmp with a symphony piped through the sound card. I've not developed mine enough to offer it to anyone, but surely it could be done. It might be an outstanding gift to the net from the folks at the Free Software Foundation. (hint hint!) PAT] ------------------------------ From: nospam.tonypo@nospam.ultranet.com (Tony Pelliccio) Subject: WE/AT&T Paint & Process Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:46:53 -0500 Organization: The Bit Bucket Hello! I'm new to restoring telephones and am curious about how the folks at Western Electric/AT&T used to recondition the finish on the bakelite phones. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks, Tony ------------------------------ From: Wrong@home.net (Wrong Number) Subject: E911 Illinois Requirements Date: 23 Feb 1999 00:42:04 GMT Organization: Your Organization Reply-To: badams@infi.net Help !!! Just found out about an Ill law, passed in 1994 which gives Business's untill June 1999 to have exact station location information show up on 911 calls. The way I understand it a PBX I have in Alsip Il. has to provide the PBX ext. number and location (i.e. Rm 212, 2ed floor) whenever anyone dials 911 from behi8nd the PBX. Anyone know about this law? And if so ... any suggestions? I'm looking at $5500 for pbx Equ. and an additional $260/month to the LEC for Cama type trunks. Anyone know the cost of ISDN from the LEC or other local service provider? Any insight, help, and/or information would be greatly appreciated. Bill badams@infi.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 22:16:11 -0800 From: Joseph Singer Subject: Alternative to Telco Voice Messaging USWest offers telephone company provided voice messaging at $6.95 per month, but there is another company in Seattle which offers free voice messaging service. If you combine it with USWest's busy/no answer service at $2.40 per month you save yourself $4.55 per month. They also use a flavor of the Octel voice messaging software. The tradeoff is that you have to listen to a five second advertisement when you go to retrieve your messages. The service also allows you to make 25¢ flat rate calls to Tacoma, Everett and Portland. The service is called "Tele-helper" or the local signup line in Seattle is 206-621-7805. Tele-helper has recently expanded to the Portland area as well. Joseph Singer Seattle, Washington USA [ICQ pgr] +1 206 405 2052 [msg] PO Box 23135 Seattle WA 98102-0435 USA ------------------------------ From: Donald Seeley Subject: Baudot Sequence Logic Date: 23 Feb 1999 05:07:06 GMT Organization: EnterAct, L.L.C. Apologies in advance if this is off topic, but I have been unsuccessfully trying to determine the logic to the sequence of the Baudot character set. This is what I mean: ASCII Dec Baudot Dec A 65 A 03 B 66 B 25 C 67 C 14 D 68 D 09 E 69 E 01 Can anyone confirm that the sequence is that of the typebars on a Teletype machine? Something else? I await your resolution to this puzzle and my subsequent [pun intended] restful nights. TIA, Don Seeley Daring Designs Typography - Graphics - Layout http://www.daringdesigns.com/~dschi/ dschi@daringdesigns.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #19 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 24 15:46:07 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA27876; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 15:46:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 15:46:07 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902242046.PAA27876@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #20 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Feb 99 15:46:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 20 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Privacy Hack on Pentium III (Monty Solomon) Always a New Product ... (Deborah Bryant) Re: Ring in the Values: Old Phones Are Major Collectibles (lwin) Help Needed with Ionospheric Propagation (pederiska@hotmail.com) California ISDN Users' Group Newsletter (Bob Larribeau) Cordless Phone Causes Huge Phone Bill (dlore@iname.com) Re: E911 Illinois Requirements (Bruce Larrabee) Re: Baudot Sequence Logic (David Clayton) Re: Baudot Sequence Logic (Dik Winter) Re: Baudot Sequence Logic (Reed) Re: Baudot Sequence Logic (James Gifford) Re: Baudot Sequence Logic (Fred Goldstein) Re: Baudot Sequence Logic (Rich Osman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 23:41:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Privacy Hack on Pentium III http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/18078.html by Leander Kahney 12:00 p.m. 23.Feb.99.PST A German computer magazine claims to have found a way to hack the controversial serial number in the forthcoming Pentium III chip. Computer Technology, or c't, says that contrary to Intel's claims, the identifying Processor serial number in the Pentium III can be secretly turned on and off without the user's knowledge by a small software program. Intel included the number in the chip to provide a secure identifier for e-commerce and help system administrators keep track of large networks. But an outcry from privacy activists, who said the ID number would make it impossible to remain anonymous on the Internet, forced Intel to recommend that computer manufacturers ship systems with the identifying number turned off. Intel claims this is secure because once turned off, the number cannot be turned on again without a hardware reset, typically when the computer is shut down and rebooted -- a feature Intel said was designed to make it near-impossible for the serial number to be reset without the users' knowledge. Pentium III machines will come with a special software utility to let users turn the number on and off. "We have proven that this is wrong," said Christian Persson, editor in chief of c't, a bi-weekly magazine based in Hannover. "We must ask if there is any use for the serial number any more." According to Persson, the magazine's on/off hack exploits the Pentium III's deep sleep mode, a form of hardware reset that doesn't actually turn the system completely off. The serial number is reset when the chip is woken up. Persson says the reset can be done over the Internet, via a Direct X control, or better, implemented as a Trojan horse in a software installer. "To do it in a good way, you have to hide it from the user," Persson says. "It's best to do it during installation of software, as a Trojan horse. Then you can read the number, store it anywhere on the computer, and send it at any time." Persson said the flaw was discovered by Andreas Stiller, a hardware editor and the magazine's resident chip expert. Persson said Stiller worked out the hack from published plans of the chip and system architecture. "It was only a question of time before crackers used this procedure because it is not based on secret information." Persson said. Persson said Intel in Germany confirmed that the chip's serial number can indeed be reset this way and now recommends computer manufacturers put a special on-off switch in the system BIOS -- a layer of control inaccessible to most users -- to prevent the serial number being switched on by software. However, Intel in the US stood by its claims that the serial number can only be re-enabled after a hardware reset and that it has recommended all along that manufacturers put another switch in BIOS for extra security. "The way we designed it was to make it difficult for someone hacking or sending a virus over the Internet to reset the serial number without your knowledge," said spokesman Tom Waldrop from Intel's Santa Clara, California, headquarters. "It is conceivable that a control utility can be hacked or a serial number read but it's very difficult. And you have to ask what would be done with the number after it was read? What good is it to anyone anyway?" Waldrop said that the deep sleep mode is only a feature of chips for mobile systems, which will not be available immediately. Further, Waldrop says Intel's on/off utility polls the CPU every 15 seconds to make sure the chip's status corresponds to the utility's default setting. If the default setting is off but the serial number has been secretly turned on, the utility will reset the serial number after 15 seconds. The chip does not have to be hardware reset to turn the serial number off, Waldrop noted. The Electronic Privacy Information Center, which helps organize the BigBrotherInside boycott campaign, called for a recall of the chip. "It looks like a pretty serious flaw," said Dave Banisar, EPIC's policy director. "It's been one disaster after another for Intel. It was inevitable that someone would discover how to do something like this. All of Intel's claims that people's privacy was going to be protected was built on a house of sand." However, Persson says that while he understands the importance of privacy issues, he doesn't think the Pentium III serial number is a serious invasion of privacy. Persson pointed out that there are unique serial numbers on a lot of hardware, especially hard disks, that could also be used for ID purposes if anyone cared to. "Really this is not such a big issue," he says. "I must say, I do not understand all the fuss. I think people do not like Intel so much and use this to kick their ass." Copyright ) 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ========================= [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: He raises a good point in mentioning that there are all sorts of serial numbers on the hardware installed in a typical computer, and that most of these are easily accessible by someone simply asking the computer what they are. This of course assumes the user knows *which locations in the computer's memory* to query. And what about every fresh installation of Windows which asks the user to enter his name, etc? What about cell phones which always transmit their (presumably unchangeable) ESN on every transmission? Just as people learned how to fix things so the ESN could be changed on cell phones, I am sure before long ways to change the serial number on the Intel chip will be known, and those people who have serious concerns about privacy will learn how to do it. One would think also that modems have serial numbers or other unique identifiers they could pass along on the sneak when requested, etc. Of coruse you can change modems for your computer easier that you change change other internal parts, but still ... PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:40:07 -0800 Subject: Always a New Product ... From: Deborah Bryant Pat: Another "anti-product" from one of the LECs. I know the perennial pain-in-the-butt telemarketing calls is one of your favorite peeves ... leave it to US West to find a way to make 6.95 a month "thwarting" the calls. This is from a recent press release put out by US West. Thanks always for a great digest. Deborah Bryant ******* U S WEST Launching Additional Services to Help Customers Disconnect From Unwanted Sales Calls --Two New Services Deter Telemarketers While Letting Important Calls Through-- DENVER - Anyone who has ever had their dinner or other family time interrupted by a sales call can now put an end to unwanted disruptions. U S WEST will be offering two new ways to give telemarketers the boot. * To eliminate unwanted telemarketing calls U S WEST is expanding its No Solicitation SM service in 11 of its 14 states. No Solicitation is designed to deter phone solicitors while letting other, more important calls through. No Solicitation is available to both residential and small business customers. * Additionally, U S WEST soon will be offering a second feature called Caller ID with Privacy + SM which requires telemarketers to identify themselves. "I don't know anyone who hasn't been frustrated, at one time, by unwanted sales calls and wished they had a way to block them from their lives," said Liz Fetter, vice president and general manager of US WEST's Consumer Services Group. "If family or personal time is going to be interrupted by a phone call, customers can now choose whether they want that call to be from a telemarketer. These services give control of their phone service back to the customer." With No Solicitation, all but designated callers, between 8AM and 9PM, will hear the message - "You have reached a number that does not accept solicitation. If you are a solicitor, please add this number to your do not call list and hang up now. Otherwise please press 'one' or stay on the line." Customers can select up to 25 friends, family members and other frequent callers to bypass the No Solicitation message automatically. "No Solicitation can help protect valuable family time from unwanted sales calls, which have become a frustratingly common occurrence," said Mike Rouleau, vice president of marketing for U S WEST !NTERPRISE Networking. "No Solicitation sends a clear message to telephone solicitors that their calls are not welcome at any time." No Solicitation is available to U S WEST customers in Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, Nebraska, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington and Utah for $6.95 per month. Interested customers should check for availability in their area. The service can be ordered by calling 1-800-244-1111 or on U S WEST's website at http://www.uswest.com. Caller ID with Privacy + helps to eliminate telemarketing calls by requiring callers whose names appear as "Unavailable" on Caller ID units to identify themselves. This service requires these unidentified callers to identify themselves by sending their Caller ID data or recording their name allowing the subscriber to choose whether to accept the call. U S WEST expects to introduce Caller ID with Privacy + within the next two months in selected cities across its 14-state region. U S WEST's suite of Call Management products also includes Do Not Disturb, which allows customers to block incoming calls; U S WEST Dial Lock SM, that blocks all outgoing calls, except for emergency 911 calls, from being completed. U S WEST CallCurfew SM, blocks both incoming and outgoing calls, except to 911, during set periods of time. Products may not be available in all areas and some restrictions may apply. ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) Subject: Re: Ring in the Values: Old Phones Are Major Collectibles Date: 23 Feb 1999 23:23:34 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS Per Pat's comment regarding the usefulness of old phones: I use a 302 set (WE 1948), and I find audio quality of that indistinguishable from contemporary phones. The only disadvantage is that the handset is very heavy and is tiring to hold and the ringer is non adjustable. [The 300 series, which came out in 1938, predated the 500 series which came out in 1950.] Many of the older 200 series (the original "french style" phones of the 1920s) were retrofitted with 300-type handsets. Also, many candlestick phones were retrofitted with 300 elements. As such, the phones were able to remain in service for many years. A component of audio quality for candlestick and 200 style phones is if they're hooked up with a good "network" and anti-sidetone circuit. Without one they sound lousy. The 300 series and later phones had the network and ringer box built into the base of the unit. ------------------------------ From: pederiska@hotmail.com Subject: Help Needed with Ionospheric Propagation Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:14:54 PST Hello! I am a Msc student in communication engineering, and I have come accross your great internet site, so I was wondering if you could tell me where on net I can find some general info on ionospheric propagation. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thank you. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Anyone who cares to answer this person directly feel free to do so. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bob Larribeau Subject: California ISDN Users' Group Newsletter Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:26:47 -0800 Organization: InterNex Information Services 1-800-595-3333 The latest California ISDN Users Group Newsletter is now available on our web site at http://www.ciug.org/newsletter/ With this newsletter we are announcing major changes in the organization, including a new name and mission. We are going to call ourselves the California Broadband Users' Group or CalBUG. We are extending our mission to include not only ISDN, but also DSL, cable modems, broadband wireless, and anything else that comes down the road. We are also announcing our Broadband Access Technologies conference to be held on June 15 & 16 at the Santa Clara Convention center. This issue also includes following articles: Pacific Bell misses CPUC Quality Goals Pacific Bell introduces $39 ADSL Wavepath Wireless Service NorthPoint expands Wireless Service Bob Larribeau Chairman ------------------------------ From: dlore@iname.com Subject: Cordless Phone Creates Huge Phone Bill Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 23:01:20 +0200 Organization: NetVision Israel Hi! Can anyone explain to me the following? I just received an outrageously high phone bill. It is extremely unlikely that I made all the calls. A friend of mine told me that she had the same problem -- a very high bill with calls she definitly did not make. She told me that it most probably had to do with my using a portable phone inside my house (as oppposed to a phone with a cord from the handset to the base). She said that somehow someone else's calls were being charged on my bill as a result of their porta-phone and my porta-phones airwaves or channels getting mixed up (I live in an apartment building). I know that it is possible to eavesdrop on a porta-phone but how EXACTLY (Please Explain!) is it possible for someone else's calls to go on my bill. Is it only on outgoing or also incoming calls? Is it charged even if I only speak for a second or do I have to speak longer than they speak? How can I prevent this? Thanks for your time. dlore@iname.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are lots of things to answer here, so let's get the easy answers out of the way first. The alleged interception of your phone line by other parties has nothing to do with when/where you use your cordless phone. Inside or out, it makes no difference. The base unit of your cordless phone is triggered, or taken off hook, when it receives signals of a certain radio freq- ency from the handset. If you are using an older style cordless phone without additional security features built into it, then your base unit will quite likely respond to other cordless phones from nearby places which happen to be on the same frequency. Newer cordless phones allow you to set a 'code' -- typically one out of about 65,000 possible combinations -- which make this situation almost impossible. Any type of phone call which can be made using a 'regular' (or corded) phone -- incoming, outgoing, long distance, local, premium surcharge, etc -- can be made using a cordless phone. Years ago, when all cordless phones were on one single frequency, a game played by phone phreaks was known as 'cruising for dial tone'. They would drive up and down streets with only a cordless handset, which they held to their ear listening for dial tone as they came within transmission range of someone else's base unit. They would place a call and the other person would get the bill. And as cordless phones became more widely in use with several in a single apartment complex for example, there needed to be no malicious intent at all; the receivers and base units frequently 'heard each other' and 'talked to each other' out of confusion due to the strength of the radio signal. Thus, the addition of several different frequencies for use by cordless phones and the addition of 'security coding' to help the base units identify the proper handset, etc. **I do not think this is your problem.** It might be, but you need to look a bit further. First, have you yet disputed the bill with your telecom authority? Begin by doing that, and paying some portion of the bill which you believe is reasonable. Ask for a print out of the calls billed to your account for the period in question. Examine this print out (you may already have this if you received a detailed phone bill with calls listed, etc) as follows: Immediatly mark off those numbers you recognize, regardless of the time of day or length of call. Assume you made those calls and be responsible for them. It is unlikely anyone who intercepted your line would have called the same people. Now go through the detailed list a second time, and look at the calls made during the times of day and days of the week when you likely would have been at home and could possibly have made the call even if you have forgotten about it. Look for slight variations in the digits indicating a call which was misdialed, but off hook long enough for charging to begin. If necessary, use a cross-reference or 'criss cross' style style directory to try and jog your memory with names, etc. Finally, note any remaining calls made at times when you could not possibly have made them; i.e. calls in the middle of the day when you are always at work/school; calls at 5 AM when you are always asleep, etc. Look for recurring patterns, the same number dialed more than once, always about the same time of day. Have the detailed list of calls organized in this way when you have further discussions with the telecom office. Be prepared to pay immediatly for all those calls you recognize, as a way to encourage telecom to work with you on the rest of it. Try unplugging the base unit except at those times when you are at home and specifically want to use your cordless phone. If the problem is with unauthorized calls through your base unit via someone else's handset this should not only cure the problem but also identify it as the reason for the high bill you did receive. If the problem ends at that point, then you lose :( ... you are responsible for the use of your instruments on telecom's lines; your cordless device failed to properly identify who was and was not authorized to make calls. What immediatly caught my eye however was your mention of living in an *apartment building*. If unplugging your base unit except when you are there to supervise its operation does NOT solve the problem -- that is, the unidentified calls continue to appear on your bill each month -- then perhaps -- perhaps! -- you win :) I am going to assume at this point you do not have any children, roomates, etc who would make calls when you were not around. I assume no one has access to your living quarters when you are not around. If this is not the case, then you might want to investigate those possibilities as well. Again, examining your phone bill closely might give you some clues about the problem. So what is it then that makes 'apartment building' of importance in all this. I do not know where you live, but in many large cities with older apartment buildings of considerable size, the cables from the phone company are notorious in their placement and wiring. Over the years many changes in the cable and wire pairs within the cable will have been made, many times without the proper notations being made in 'plant' (or central office exchange) records, and many times these changes will have been incorrectly or incompletely finished. The phone company does not literally have five million wire pairs for a city of five million people. It has what it needs looped around in such a way that it can open and close the wire pairs to a customer and then use the same wire pairs for another customer (opening or closing the pairs at some other point in the loop) at a different time. These opening/closing points in the cable are often referred to as 'multiples'. The 'pair' to your apartment for example might be 'multipled' elsewhere in the apartment building or even in an apartment building across the street. Imagine a library for example: I borrow a book from the shelf, read it and return it. While I am using it you have to find a different one. When I return it, now you can have it. While you are hooked up to the telephone network on a pair of wires, no one else can use those wires. When your phone service is discontinued, the pairs become available for someone else to use. In *theory* all other points on the cable where a multiple appears are supposed to be 'opened' -- that is, made unavailable for use. In *actual practice* sometimes a phone technician putting in new service forgets to go around and 'open' all the sub-loops or multiples on the wire except for his new installation. Or maybe the computer records tell him this has already been done, or maybe the records tell him that no one else is assigned to the wire pair being assigned to you, but in fact there is a subscriber already using it. Telephone company 'outside plant' records are notoriously incorrect. Watch a telephone technician working on a pole or at the main demarc point for an older (large) apartment building as he sometimes struggles to find a 'good working pair' for a new installation being done. Sometimes unethical people who are sophisticated in telephone company wiring practices will deliberatly go to a demarc and connect wires allowing them to use someone else's service. If the wire pair has been assigned to you and someone else enters the pair at a multiple secretly, then any direct dialed calls billed to your number are going to appear to the telephone switch as though you made them. Sometimes there is no malicious intent; telecom just gives two subscribers the same pair by accident. So this may be a defense you have also against the charges on your bill, but the context here is all-important, ie the kind of building you live in, its age, how the wiring to the building is done, etc. A single house in a new housing development in the past few years is not nearly as likely to have this occurrance as someone who lives in a thirty or forty year old highrise building in an inner-city neigh- borhood with a shortage of phone wire pairs. If your problem of a high phone bill with unidentifiable calls only happens once, telecom is likely to accept your payment, write off the balance as goodwill and say no more. It is not worth the trouble to find out what happened. If the problem persists more than a single billing interval and keeping your cordless base unit unplugged when not needed and under close supervision when it is plugged in does not solve the problem, then your repeated requests for credit and/or adjustment is going to pique someone's curiosity at telecom and get them to looking other places for a solution. The first thing *they* are going to tell you is that the problem is with your cordless phone, your children, people you allow in your home, your spouse, etc. Have all these possibilities eliminated before you insist that they look further on their end. They also love to place the blame on computer modems by the way; 'your computer must have made that call while you were asleep/away from home/using the computer but thought you were making another call, etc', so it might be helpful to know for sure that your computer is not making some calls it should not be making when you walk away leaving it turned on or the modem connected to the phone line. Good luck tracking it down! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 24 Feb 1999 14:57:35 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: larb0@aol.com (Bruce Larrabee) Subject: Re: E911 Illinois Requirements I seem to remember that the deadline for that ICC policy was postponed? You could check with the ICC itself (http://www.state.il.us/ICC). I assume you're speaking of ISDN PRI, since you have a PBX. Ameritech should be able to help with pricing. You could also check with competitive carriers such as Focal, Nextlink, MFS, etc. I think these offer PRI ... Bruce Larrabee ------------------------------ From: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au (David Clayton) Subject: Re: Baudot Sequence Logic Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:09:10 GMT Organization: Customer of OzEmail/Access One Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia Reply-To: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Donald Seeley contributed the following: > Apologies in advance if this is off topic, but I have been unsuccessfully > trying to determine the logic to the sequence of the Baudot character set. > This is what I mean: > ASCII Dec Baudot Dec > A 65 A 03 > B 66 B 25 > C 67 C 14 > D 68 D 09 > E 69 E 01 > Can anyone confirm that the sequence is that of the typebars on a Teletype > machine? Something else? The only logic I could determine from the ole' International Telegraph Alphabet No. 2 is that the layout of the "qwerty" keyboard mapped to a mechanically easy way to produce the punch tape patterns on the original machines. Apart from that it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I do remember being told a story that the "querty" keyboard layout was designed to slow down the typing to a speed the first machines could handle by making the layout as counter-productive as possible! Regards, David Clayton, e-mail: dcstar@acslink.aone.net.au Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Still think the 20th century ends after 1999?, check this URL: http://riemann.usno.navy.mil/AA/faq/docs/faq2.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 11:08:35 MET From: Dik.Winter@cwi.nl (Dik Winter) Subject: Re: Baudot Sequence Logic Actually, although called Baudot, this is the Murray code (International Alphabet 2). Baudot code (International Alphabet 1) is completely different. But neither has any relation to the typebars on a Teletype. Both are based on less bits on for frequent letters. The pairing with non-alphabetics *was* based on what was on the typebars. dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131 home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/ ------------------------------ From: Reed Subject: Re: Baudot Sequence Logic Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:02:16 -0700 Organization: None whatsoever There is some interesting background info on Baudot code etc at http://www.vmeng.com/minow/papertape/papertape.html ------------------------------ From: James Gifford Reply-To: gifford@ns.net Organization: Heinlein Central | CT Magazine Subject: Re: Baudot Sequence Logic Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 22:00:27 GMT It was invented by a Frenchman, and what's worse, a turn-of-the-century one. You expect LOGIC to be a factor? Clearly, you've never watched a Truffaut movie, worked with SECAM or tried to fix a Citroen. :) Seriously, I know that some of the early binary encoding techniques were designed to minimize the number of bit changes from one character to the next. That might be a factor here. I can't find a chart of the Baudot digits to confirm, but try looking at the binary sequencing and see if there's a pattern. | James Gifford | | Associate Editor, Computer Telephony Magazine | | = Speaking only for myself in this case = | ------------------------------ From: fgoldstein@my-dejanews.com Subject: Re: Baudot Sequence Logic Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 22:09:53 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion I may have been the 1975 edition of the RTTY Handbook (which I edited) that contained a description of how an olde Teletype worked. There were five horizontal bars, some combination of which would be lifted by the five bits following the start bit. A motor moved contacts past the actuators for each bar, so the bits literally set the bars. And they in turn set the type wheel's position, so the hammer would strike it after the stop bit arrived. Of course the layout of the letters on the type wheel was done to match the Baudot code's action on the bars, so it was still perhaps arbitrary. My guess is that it had to do with minimizing the wheel motion on the most common letters. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 04:44:41 -0600 From: Rich Osman Reply-To: oz@hex.net Organization: Paranoia was Overcome Subject: Re: Baudot Sequence Logic I believe that it was selected to minimize the number of transitions in average text. Baudot was a code conceived for mechanical transmission, and so letter frequency was used to select codes to minimize mechanical wear and tear for frequently used letters I don't have an authoritative reference for this, it's just something I remember hearing back when I was doing ham radio teletype with model 14's, 15's, 19's, and a 28. Oz@hex.net Rich Osman +1 972-879-2301 (Pager) POB 93167; Southlake, TX 76092 (Near DFW Airport) ARS: WB0HUQ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #20 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Feb 24 17:38:02 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA03913; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 17:38:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 17:38:02 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902242238.RAA03913@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #21 TELECOM Digest Wed, 24 Feb 99 17:37:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 21 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Junk E-Mail Filters Spawn a Suit Against Microsoft (Monty Solomon) "Science: The Endless Frontier" and the ICANN/IANA Problem (Ronda Hauben) Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime (Monty Solomon) Caller Pays and Code Calling (David Chessler) Re: You Call, You Pay (Massimiliano Scagliarini) Re: You Call, You Pay (Robert L. McMillin) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Junk E-Mail Filters Spawn a Suit Against Microsoft Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 17:23:18 -0500 http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/02/cyber/cyberlaw/19law.html By CARL S. KAPLAN Last November, near the peak of the holiday greeting card season, executives at Blue Mountain Arts discovered something odd. The Colorado-based company runs a popular Web site which lets people create free personalized electronic greeting cards. It found that a program by Microsoft was blocking some e-mail messages telling greeting card recipients to pick up their cards at the site. That discovery sparked a closely watched lawsuit that is pitting the rights of a software company to innovate freely against the rights of a company that says its business was disrupted because its notices were labeled as junk e-mail. There are many wrinkles in the case, including allegations that Microsoft engaged in illegal tactics to protect its own virtual greeting card business. But the most significant aspect of the lawsuit is that it could be the first of many cases that ask courts to consider the damage caused when e-mail is unfairly or inadvertently blocked by increasingly sophisticated filtering technology, legal experts say. "This is an early lawsuit in what will become a classic grievance," said Blake Bell, a lawyer who specializes in Internet issues at the New York office of Simpson Thacher & Bartlett. "Filters of all kinds will increasingly have a substantial impact on a company's ability to conduct e-commerce, and the [blocked] company will have a desire to assert legal claims in order to secure an unfettered ability to compete." According to legal papers filed in California Superior Court, Santa Clara County, Microsoft created an electronic greeting card site last November that competed with Blue Mountain's site, which is among the most popular sites on the Web. Around the same time, the company began offering a new trial version of its free browser, Internet Explorer. The browser included an e-mail component, Outlook Express, with a new filter for junk mail, also known as "spam." When the program was first installed, the filter was turned off. But when turned on and operating under its default settings, it routed Blue Mountain's greeting card notifications to a "junk mail" folder. At about the same time, Blue Mountain discovered that the e-mail system at Microsoft's WebTV subsidiary had blocked the receipt of thousands of Blue Mountain greeting cards, according to legal papers. Blue Mountain protested to Microsoft, and the block was removed after about eight days. Frustrated at what it later said was Microsoft's refusal to fix the filter immediately, Blue Mountain filed a complaint against the company in early December. The suit accused Microsoft of unfair competition under state law, intentional interference with Blue Mountain's business relationships, trade libel -- for labeling its e-mail as "junk" -- and other wrongs. At the heart of the suit was the allegation that Microsoft changed its junk mail filter to purposely derail the greeting card business activities of a competitor. "I think anybody in the business of making a filter has to be very diligent in ensuring their filter does not discriminate against competitors," Jared Schutz, executive director of Blue Mountain, said in an interview this week. For its part, Microsoft said in court papers that the unit that developed the junk mail filter was totally separate from and uninfluenced by the unit that created its electronic greeting card business. Moreover, the company said the early version of the filter inadvertently snagged the notification messages for Microsoft's own electronic greeting cards, as well as the messages from Blue Mountain and other greeting card companies, because they matched some of the common characteristics of junk e-mail. Microsoft said it tried to help Blue Mountain solve the problem in late November by suggesting changes in the notification messages. Courts and lawyers should expect more cases brought by parties who claim they have been silenced by software. Judge Robert A. Baines of California Superior Court has been sympathetic to Blue Mountain's arguments so far. Late last month, he issued a preliminary injunction that broadly bans Microsoft from distributing or selling any product that impedes the delivery of Blue Mountain greeting cards or notification messages to the intended recipient's in-box. The injunction becomes effective on February 27, and Microsoft has 30 days to appeal the order. Although Blue Mountain says that the latest version of the Microsoft filter is letting its e-mail through, both sides say a trial for past damages is still likely. In issuing his preliminary injunction on January 28, Judge Baines pointedly expressed his view -- based on sealed evidence including Microsoft e-mail and other documents -- that it was "beyond coincidence" and "difficult if not impossible to accept" that the Microsoft employees developing the filter were unaware of the electronic greeting card area of Microsoft's business or that the filter was developed without any input from the greeting card group. "I realize Microsoft is large, but I simply have a difficult time accepting the fact that one hand didn't know what the other was doing to that extent," the judge said. He added later: "So I do believe that there was some intent on [Microsoft's] part ... not only to filter out spam generally, but that there was some concern or outright targeting of Blue Mountain or similar outfits that were in competition offering electronic greeting cards." In another part of his decision, the judge noted that based on evidence presented by both sides, Microsoft tried to buy Blue Mountain, or at least explored the possibility of buying it, before November 1998. Linda Norman, a senior corporate lawyer for Microsoft, said in an interview that the judge's tentative conclusions concerning Microsoft were unfortunate. "At a trial we will present the full story," she said. "We never intended to target Blue Mountain" with the filter, she said. Norman added that a trial verdict against Microsoft could also set a bad precedent, because there is no guarantee that a software feature will work perfectly. If Microsoft is held to a standard of perfection by the courts, "it will become impossible to design anything that's innovative," she said. Gary L. Reback, a lawyer for Blue Mountain, said in an interview that Blue Mountain put a lot of sealed evidence in front of the judge "which led the court to conclude as it did." "Beyond that, I can't comment specifically on the evidence," he said. Experts say junk mail filters can be a convenience given the ever-increasing volume of unsolicited commercial e-mail, but they can be risky. After all, they involve letting a machine decide which e-mail messages are important and which are not. "You can potentially do a lot of damage with spam filters," said Paul Hoffman, director of the Internet Mail Consortium, a trade group that includes Microsoft. "I'm not particularly happy with the court telling Microsoft what to do, but I don't have a better solution to propose" in the Blue Mountain case, he said. Some experts believe the Blue Mountain case may not have wide ramifications because the company performing the filtering is a competitor with a dominant market position. "Microsoft has a problem because of its large market share and its labeling of a competitor's product as junk mail," said Anthony Lupo, an Internet expert and lawyer in Washington. A more straightforward case in the future -- involving non-competitors who agree that the filtering was inadvertent -- could press harder on the notion of business libel or misrepresentation, rather than unfair competition, he said. In any case, courts and lawyers should expect more cases brought by parties who claim they have been silenced by software. "I can also see this spreading to other contexts, such as 'smart' search engines that omit certain major companies" because of fee arrangements, said Bell of Simpson Thacher. "This case is a harbinger of things to come." Carl S. Kaplan at kaplanc@nytimes.com welcomes your comments and suggestions. Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ From: rh120@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Ronda Hauben) Subject: "Science: The Endless Frontier" and the ICANN/IANA Problem Date: 24 Feb 1999 17:25:36 GMT Organization: Columbia University Reply-To: rh120@mailrelay2.cc.columbia.edu On Vannevar's Bush's "Science: The Endless Frontier" and the ICANN/IANA problem: Following are some thoughts on trying to put what is happening with the U.S. government transferring ownership and control over essential points of control of the Internet into a private sector entity controlled by who knows whom, and currently called ICANN (i.e.giving away the Internet's controlling functions of the IP numbers, DNS system, port numbers, protocols, etc.) Recently I read Vannevar Bush's proposal about "Science The Endless Frontier". I have found "Science the Endless Frontier" quite fascinating in the argument it makes for the importance of U.S. government support for basic science and technology research. It is helpful to see the description of why such research is so important to the well being of the economic and social life of society. And it puts the research on defense questions within a broader context of social questions and proposes that there be one scientific entity within U.S. government to support this broader range of science (which would include defense related research). It makes it seem as if ARPA is the prototype of a broader form of entity that is needed so that the social context is the framework for the support of basic science and technology research, including defense basic research. The real problem with the Internet is that the U.S. government doesn't seem to be supporting research about how to provide for the scaling of it. And the U.S. government's effort to transfer ownership and policy over IANA functions which include both control over the Internet as well as the scaling mechanism of the Internet, to some hidden entity (hidden behind ICANN) seems a great problem for those who care about the continued well being and development of the Internet and are dependent on the Internet for real life needs and especially for communication. In this context it would seem there is a need for the U.S. government to support the scaling and further development of the Internet, and particularly the IANA functions. As the important development of research by IPTO/ARPA under the Dept. of Defense provided the basis for a public communications structure, this leads to looking back at Bush's recommendations as they have proven to be the inspiration for important developments like the Internet. (Also this leads to realizing that in fact good communication among the people of a nation are indeed what sets the basis for defense of the people of that nation. And that good communication among people around the world is a real weapon in the battle against the forces that want to enslave any people. So that the Internet is indeed the kind of development that is the proper and valuable kind of activity for the defense agencies of the governments of the peoples of nation/s around the world.) Bush proposed that the defense related research be carried out by a U.S. government entity in the context of a broader social framework for scientific research. He also proposed that other forms of scientific research along with the defense related scientific research be part of the new science research agency he was proposing. Bush develops a broad set of arguments about why science and technology work have to be done for the economy to develop. I had been following some leads to figure out what is behind the ICANN and got back to the Office of Inspector General's Report of 1997 where she proposed the need to maintain scientific and government expertise in administering and setting policy for IANA functions. However, it seem that she lost her job as a result of such recommendations, and instead the Framework for Electronic Commerce was written and ICANN set up to give IANA away to those who promote "market" activity. So it seems that the contest is between: 1) seeing the Internet as the confirmation of the power of Bush's recommendation on the importance of government supporting basic research in science and technology; versus 2) the contrary view that says that the market will create all that the society needs and government has to help the market to function. #1 seems to be the line of forward direction, and #2 and the ICANN developments and the effort, to reverse this forward direction. The important developments at IPTO/ARPA over the past 30 years are a demonstration of the fact that what Bush proposes is not just a theory, but has in fact been demonstrated. Hence the great importance of increasing government support for basic science and technology research. But instead the U.S. current government policy is in the opposite direction. And the U.S. government support for ICANN the weathervane of that harmful policy. Ronda ronda@panix.com Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook also in print edition ISBN 0-8186-7706-6 ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 14:47:54 -0500 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/feb99/valaw23.htm The Associated Press Wednesday, February 24, 1999; 10:11 a.m. EST RICHMOND, Va. Legislation that would make it a crime to clog the Internet with unsolicited junk e-mail cleared the General Assembly and is on its way to Gov. Jim Gilmore. The House of Delegates on Tuesday approved a bill aimed at Internet users who advertise products by sending thousands or even millions of e-mail messages, or "spam," to other users all throughout a computer network. Gilmore has said he will sign the bill into law. Virginia would become the second state to criminalize spamming. California enacted such a law last year, said Neil Osten of the National Conference of State Legislatures. Spammers frequently promote sexually explicit Web sites, and sometimes the spam output is so massive that it causes backups or crashes on the networks of Internet service companies. "Spam is a scourge on legitimate Internet commerce," said David Botkins, a spokesman for Attorney General Mark Earley, who supported the bill. "This legislation is crucial to the high-tech community, and the attorney general is prepared to help enforce this law when and where appropriate." The Senate had already approved the bill, and the House agreed to Senate amendments to it. Other states have passed laws making spamming grounds for a lawsuit, but Virginia is the first to approve legislation making it a crime. Many spammers use false online identities to send the mass e-mailings to avoid being kicked off of the Internet. The legislation would make that a misdemeanor. Violations could rise to the level of a felony if spamming is caused by a "malicious act" and results in more than $2,500 in damage to the victim. It also would make it illegal to own software that helps people falsify their online identities. The legislation also creates civil penalties for spammers whose e-mails cause a computer system to crash. The fines would range from $10 per message to $25,000 per day. Dulles-based America Online, which has more than 16 million subscribers, supports the legislation. "In general, our customers strongly dislike spam," said Randall Boe, associate general counsel the nation's largest online services company. AOL is already going after spammers using existing state laws where possible, Boe said. But the hard part is getting damage awards. "We have only been able to recover the cost of sending e-mail," which is a very small amount, Boe said. The American Civil Liberties Union sees the legislation as a violation of the constitutional right to free expression. "Expression is protected in the commercial context as well as the noncommercial context, and no one has yet to come up with a valid or compelling state interst in limiting the way e-mail is sent," said Kent Willis, executive director of the ACLU in Virginia. Copyright 1999 The Associated Press ------------------ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So if it becomes illegal to own or use software which allows the sender of email to conceal his true identity then what happens to unix admins who have sendmail on their site with its ability to set -f by (in unix parlance) trusted users? What happens to those sites which still maintain open mail relays? (Yes, there are a few) ... I do not think there should be a law against spam as such; the law should be directed against any email to which the recipient has no recourse. Existing laws which pertain to sending regular 'paper' mail should be automatically amended to include email, i.e. postal fraud; theft or intervention of mail not intended for the person who 'opens' it, etc. Sending spam for fraudulent purposes should be handled like any regular mail sent for fraudulent purposes. Sending spam that is legal is nature (regardless of how obnoxious or boorish and foolish it may happen to be) should be protected and subject only to peer pressure from others on the net. I have always believed that as long as we are able to identify *who* sent the email -- a legitmate and meaningful identification of the user or at the very least the site where it originated -- that we as users can deal with the rest of the problem. If the government wants to have more laws -- and don't they always? -- then it should be sufficient to amend existing laws pertaining to paper mail to include email and let it go at that. Add to that something saying that users who deliberatly falsify their identity and system admins who refuse to take reasonable efforts to stop this from happening after being notifed of such a user will be punished. And of course all of this has to be taken in context. A large site with hundreds or thous- ands of users which took sophisticated efforts to stop spam yet had a user slip through now and then with it would not be treated in the same way as some site with one or two users and an 'admin' who whined that he had no way to control his users, etc. I think I would also strongly encourage admins to work together in identifying and isolating those users who had sent the unidentifiable mail. An admin could if desired refuse for privacy reasons to identify the offending user, and that would be fine, one time only per offending user. I am not saying anything that is new or not frequently in practice now. If anything I would simply codify the requirement for identifica- tion of and absolute recourse to users who send massive amounts of unsolicited email, then let the net community deal with that user. To protect the privacy rights of all users, some threshold would have to be crossed in terms of the volume of mail sent out before a demand could be made to identify the user's actual name, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 00:26:31 -0500 From: David Chessler Subject: Caller Pays and Code Calling I find interesting the recent discussion of the possibility that, if "caller-pays" were adopted for cellular and PCS telephones in the US, the cellular and PCS companies would vie to offer the lowest rates for calls the cellular user originates, and would gain their revenues by charging very high rates for incoming calls. However, I do not see any discussion of "code calling." In some areas of the country, calls from a first location (usually a city) to a second (usually a distant suburb) were charged at a low rate as a local call under extended area service (often "free" under flat rates), but the calls from the second area to the first were charged as expensive short-distance toll calls. The result was that customers in the second area "code called" the first, so they could be called back. This might have been a simple "if there is one ring, call home," or it might have been an explicit "this is X; call me back." Nowadays, paging, built into most PCS systems, and readily available everywhere, makes this easier. Code calling was always a limitation on asymetrical extended area service, and probably contributed to most such plans having been abandoned. It will be interesting to see whether "caller pays" systems with asymetrical rates will survive in this country. From what I know of European telephone tariffs, most or all calls from land-line phones are charged, usually at relatively high, timed rates. Thus, Europeans make calls in the expectation that they will be charged for them. This is not generally the case in this country; there are few places where local calls are timed (New York City is an obvious exception). Thus, resistance may be higher than advocates of "caller pays" realize. Charging high rates per minute also runs counter to recent trends in telephone pricing. At the time of the divestiture toll rates had four rate elements: Distance, Duration, Time of Day (and day of the week), and "Setup" (the first minute of the call was charged more than additional minutes). For the next few years, some pundits would predict "postal pricing." Postal pricing (dropping of the distance rate element) was delayed. However, now, under most popular calling plans, as the FCC finally gives up (or, at least, reduces) charging by the minute for the access costs that it considers "non-traffic-sensitive," and per-call fees for public telephones, both elements effectively required by the FCC). And the price per minute has dropped. Twenty-five or thirty cents a minute was common a few years ago; now everyone is offered prices under a dime in every day's mail. Rates from the US to most European countries are also dropping rapidly, and the higher rates for calls toward the US are dropping under regulatory pressure from the FCC and economic pressure (that is, competition) from "call back" operations. The growing expectation on the part of the public that the price of a telephone call be nearly free, and essentially flat-rate, is further nurtured by another trend: the flat rates most people pay for internet access -- access that may, even now, include the capability to provide voice communications in competition with telephone. Studies repeatedly show that the actual cost of a local telephone call is negligible -- a few hundredths of a cent per minute. The cost of a toll call is higher, yet the prevalence of rates of five cents per minute on Sundays (and now Saturdays) and rates as low as seven cents per minute on weekdays, even though the average access charges are about four and one-half cents per minute, suggests the direction in which telephone rates are headed. It will be difficult for cellular and PCS operators to run counter to this trend, and it will be interesting to see them them try. ____ ____ David Chessler, Ph.D., President | | | ' David Chessler and Associates |_/ & \_, Economic, Telecommunications, Statistical, ____ and Antitrust Consulting /____\ Phone: +1-301-229-9514 / \ Fax: +1-301-229-3984 chessler@capaccess.org chessler@usa.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 13:38:18 +0100 From: Massimiliano Scagliarini Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay From an European point of view, the debate that is going on about who should pay for cell-phone calls is very strange. Here in Italy, where having to pay as high as 1.1 USD per minute to call a "family" cell phone is considered normal, a lot of people see these kind of calls to be the most relevant part of their phone bill. And also, i find that our sistem is the most reasonable one: i couldn't imagine myself paying for every person that decides to tell me something while i'm not at home! Our telephone system (in Europe, I mean) is based on the caller-pays principle and so cell-phones are no exception to this rule. Of course cellulars have a different area code, so you know in advance that you are calling a mobile phone (with a different cost than normal calls). The objection moved by Mr. Matthew Black, that a cellular phone owner has always convenience to be called (and so, should always pay for the call), is very questionable: imagine, for example, the cases where you have to call a technician or a doctor, or are simply trying to date a girl! In my humble opinion, cellular phones billing should be treated the same way as traditional telephone service. The actual American system is too similar to toll-free line, and it does not give to cell-owners the right to be always available that is the main reason to buy a mobile phone. I can easily understand why my american friends are not so happy to give away their cell number, and this is also unacceptable because personally I own a cell phone to be in touch with people, and when I don't want to I simply switch it off. Surely, with the caller-pays system you will see the same cell-mania that we have here: with cheap cellular fees, every person will be glad to spend two or three hundreds dollars to have a ringing machine in his pocket that helps him to feel "important". But that's, together with the infamous "butta la pasta" call (see Wired February issue, in Rants&raves), is another story ..... ------------------------------ From: Robert L. McMillin Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 17:20:22 -0800 Organization: Syseca, Inc. Tom Betz wrote: > And it's about time. > This will make cellular valuable, finally. Cellular companies have > been trying to compensate for "Receiver Pays" terms with "first minute > free" and such like, but Caller Pays will let wireless services come > into their own. The sticking point being, who handles billing? What the LECs don't want is to have to remit payments to the cellphone companies. Having a bad taste in their mouths from 900/976 carriers, slammers, and crammers, the idea of yet another service wanting to use them as an intermediary (regardless of the quality of that service) can't be appealing. This is why we won't see it anytime soon. Robert L. McMillin | Not the voice of Syseca, Inc. | rlm@syseca-us.com Personal: rlm@helen.surfcty.com | rlm@netcom.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #21 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Feb 25 13:12:27 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA17700; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 13:12:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 13:12:27 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902251812.NAA17700@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #22 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Feb 99 13:12:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 22 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson "Old" Telephones and "Old Time" Radio (Mark J. Cuccia) @Home Document Raises Privacy Concerns (Monty Solomon) "Caller-Pays" Cellular/Wireless (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: You Call, You Pay (quonk@my-dejanews.com) Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime (John LeBlanc) Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime (James D. Wilson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 19:49:41 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: "Old" Telephones and "Old Time" Radio Pat, I have to DISagree with you, and instead AGree with Lee Winson regarding the old WECo/NECo phones. As a collector of REAL WECo/NECo telephones from the 1920's thru mid-60's (all PRE-modular), I can say that "the telephone company" (Western Electric for the US and Northern Electric for Canada) built these phones to LAST FOREVER. Some "sloppiness" began to enter in the later 1960's (as just about EVERYTHING in life and society became "sloppy" in the late 1960's), and even MORE "sloppiness" began to enter construction of WECo phones in the 1970's when modular connections were introduced, and more things plastic instead of metal or bakelite. But the REAL phones do _NOT_ seem to emit any RF (most of todays manufactured phones, with all of their "whistles and bells" and integrated circuit chips emit significant "RF"), the REAL phones don't "fall apart" in the way that today's phones are known to, even the carbon mic's (when the carbon granules are 'loose') IMO are FAR superior to the electronic mic of today's phones. And, when trying to pick-up a distant radio station, or a local 250-Watt station that I have difficulty picking up, I can ALWAYS wrap wire around the ferite bar area of the AM Radio, and hook the other end of the wire to the metal "dial-fingerstop" of the telephone. The telephone's insides of the older REAL Western/Northern equipment, while not "putting out RF", DO help out as an ANTENNAE for HELPING me pick-up AM Radio! As for "Old Time Radio" ... Much of the "scratchiness" you are referring to is how the program was RECORDED for posterity at the time it was broadcast (usually live) from back in the 1930's-50's. Most of the programs back then were TRANSCRIBED on acetate disks, similar to wax phonograph records. Many of them were 16-inches in diameter and also usually rotated at 16 rpm. Sometimes you started the program with the needle on the outer part of the disk (as in a usual phonograph record), but some transcription disks were started with the needle at the INSIDE and travelled outwards as the program played. Sometimes, the disk was to rotate clockwise, other times counterclockwise. But it depended on HOW WELL the transcription disk was produced AND STORED for over the decades! I have heard that live network radio feeds (even for pre-recorded programs) from back then, at least for mid-size and major markets (where the NETWORK paid AT&T for the transmission circuits of 5Khz bandwidth) as opposed to more rural markets (where the local affiliate had to pay the local telco for the circuit to hook-up to the nearest network 'trunk' feed - therefore the affiliate usually paid only for lower quality 3Khz bandwidth), and also considering the quality of the radio receiver's construction and 'wear/tear', as well as weather condiitions in the local station's market... that the quality was just as good (or even better) than today's (live) radio. And IMO, the acoustic quality when VACUUM TUBES are used over transistors or integrated circuits, is FAR superior! As for the 'deterioration' of older transcription disks of the network (and syndicated) radio broadcasts of the 1930's thru 1950's/early 60's (and the 1950's reel-to-reel tape which was being introduced), many of today's collectors are running their collections through DIGITAL CORRECTORS and ENHANCERS. Even programs from the 1930's that may have had a transcription that 'deteriorated' over the decades, can now be "cleaned up" to where the acoustic quality is nearly PERFECT. And even programs recorded at that time CAN sound nearly PERFECT if the transcription disk or reel of tape was taken good care of. As I type this, I'm listening to GUNSMOKE, starring William Conrad as Matt Dillon, US Marshall, this episode originally broadcast in the early 1950's over the CBS RAD))|((O NETWORK, and brought to you by Chesterfields and L&M Filters (both regular and kings- "They Satisfy")! I'm listening to it from "Yesterday USA", a 24-hour/7-day "Old Time Radio" service available via satellite (C-Band, audio subcarrier of whatever video transponder), participating Cable-TV companies (as an audio service), low-power AM/FM (I don't know if Y-USA yet has a shortwave affiliate), AND IN REALAUDIO VIA THE 'NET. The quality is excellent! With each individual tape or disk of "Old Time Radio", it all depends on how well the collector has taken care of the copy. Incidently, for those who are fans of "Old Time Radio" (and have Real Audio), Yesterday-USA's URLs: The Y-USA HomePage is: http://otr.uwsp.edu/ The Y-USA page at Broadcast.com is: http://www.broadcast.com/radio/oldtime/yestrday/ And the initial URL for the Real Audio stream is: http://www.broadcast.com/radio/ram/yestrday28.ram But, Pat, even if the acoustic quality of a particular "Old Time Radio" broadcast isn't all that superior, the CONTENT of the program is what counts! I just cannot find myself enjoying boring contemporary network Television programs, when I have an opportunity to hear "old time radio", as well as watch CLASSIC Movies (American Movie Classics on Cable-TV) and CLASSIC Television programs on TV-Land, Nick-at-Nite, etc., even for 16-mm scratched BW film prints, or 'fuzzy' 16-mm filmed kinescopes off a TV screen of an originally LIVE telecast. MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks very much for passing along that URL for a continuous feed of old time radio. I've already bookmarked it on my Real Player. I'll grant you most of today's 'over the air' television is the way Newton Minnow described it thirty years ago: a vast wasteland. There is a guy in Chicago who does an old time radio show for four hours every Saturday afternoon. (WNIB 97.1 FM from 1 to 5 pm, hosted by Chuck Shaden.) He has done his 'Golden Age of Radio' program for about 30 years now, longer than the golden age of radio itself even lasted, if we assume the commonly used dates of 1930-55. Since it is so popular, why can't that general style of programming find a place in 'modern' broadcasting? Imagine that kind of wonderful programming, but using today's audio/video advances which in the 1940- 50's era was unheard of? Quality programming combined with today's quality modes of presentation. What a novel idea, eh? PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: @Home Document Raises Privacy Concerns Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 17:49:22 -0500 http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,32834,00.html By Corey Grice Staff Writer, CNET News.com February 24, 1999, 4:25 a.m. PT Tele-Communications Incorporated will issue a letter to explain a revised service agreement for its @Home Network after consumers claimed several clauses could infringe on their rights as users. The legal document -- similar to the user agreements of other Internet service providers -- contains language that some customers have said could allow TCI to republish information sent via email or to release users' personal information to third parties. Although the revised policy raised a few eyebrows, TCI said it has only its customers in mind. "Customers rights and their privacy is a top priority," said TCI spokeswoman Katina Vlahadamis. "A lot of things were included to protect the customers as well as the company." Vlahadamis said the planned letter, intended to better explain what the new user agreement means for its Net access customers, would be sent "shortly," possibly as early as this week. TCI admitted, however, that consumer concerns could have been avoided with some careful planning and more tactful language. "The way that it's worded isn't maybe as consumer-friendly as we would have liked," Vlahadamis said. One clause in the new TCI agreement authorizes TCI to "reproduce, publish, distribute, and display ... worldwide" any content that was published, transmitted, or distributed over the @Home high-speed Net service. But TCI said the controversial clause is simply intended to protect the company from violating any copyright laws when it delivers its customers' data packets. "We don't plan to intentionally distribute this information to unintended persons," Vlahadamis said. "It's not 'publish' in the everyday use of the word; it's 'publish' in the legalese way. It gives us the copyright protection to distribute emails and the information customers want us to." Scott Greczkowski, moderator of the Connecticut @Home Users Group, is organizing a protest this weekend over the new agreement and recent performance problems that have plagued @Home in Hartford. Greczkowski plans to protest @Home's service at a hands-on trial the company is planning in Bristol, Connecticut. The revised agreement applies only to TCI @Home users, not users of @Home through other operators such as Cox Communications or Comcast. @Home has a separate "acceptable use policy." Under some interpretations of intellectual property law, mirroring content on a Web server -- as happens with @Home's and other ISPs' caching systems -- potentially violates the author's copyrights, said Dave McClure, executive director of the Association of Online Professionals. But the language in TCI's subscriber agreement may go beyond what it needs to safeguard this function, McClure added. "If this is a poorly worded contract, it should be brought to their attention," McClure said. "This is the kind of issue that can become huge." @Home said privacy is a top priority for the Internet company. "Privacy is of the utmost importance to the Internet industry and to the cable industry," said @Home spokesman Matt Wolfrom. "Cable is even more aware and under the scrutiny of privacy laws since the beginning of pay-per-view days." Cable television is governed by the Cable Privacy Act, a federal law that regulates interactive transactions. The law protects consumers from receiving product solicitations based on their pay-per-view, or other cable preferences. TCI officials said it revised the document last week in response to the impending deployment of Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS)-compliant modems, and other contractual issues. But many of the objectionable clauses were in the old document, executives said, and some users that have complained may have been reading the agreement for the first time. "There were a lot of changes to the document but we hadn't updated the document since we first launched the service," Vlahadamis said. News.com's John Borland contributed to this report. Copyright 1995-99 CNET, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy policy. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 18:04:52 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Subject: "Caller-Pays" Cellular/Wireless For the most part, Cellular phones are _NOT_ listed in the local telephone directory, nor available through (the legitimate Bell/GTE/etc) LEC directory assistance (information). Cellular phone number, BY DEFAULT are usually considered to be NON-published. I think that the FCC and/or FTC have enforcement procedures against telemarketers which call NPA-NXX codes uniquely assigned to cellular/wireless/etc. (of course, there are rural areas, small towns, and the original cellular/wireless customers which still have the SAME wireless number they've had for a LONG time, back when wireless and wireline could share the same NPA-NXX code, wireless vs. wireline services differentiated by the 'thousands' blocks of the line-number -xxxx last four digits). More cellular companies are offering unlimited (two-way) airtime packages (though not available when 'roaming'), or discounted or specials on incoming airtime. When airtime is charged for incoming, a cellular-to-cellular call, even in the same local city, whether using the same cellular system or each party on differing cellular systems, except for special packages of airtime, EACH party pays whatever wireless company some form of airtime - the call-ING cellular customer, as well as the call-ED cellular customer. I see a MAJOR problem if new wireless services offer ONLY calling- party-pays. In Canada, there is a special area code, 600. It is used for (or is intended to be used for) "calling party pays the airtime", calling to (existing? future?) satellite mobile phones in Yukon/NWT/Nunavut Territories, DATA services (such as the Stentor LEC's "DataLink"), and it WAS used for TWX (until Stentor discontinued TWX in Canada in late 1994). This 600 SAC was opened up in October 1993, as a 'swap' when Canada gave up the 610 TWX SAC for the 600 SAC. NANPA (still Bellcore at the time) wanted to assign NPA 610 to the split of NPA 215 in southeastern Pennsylvania. In Canada, where Special Area Code 600 is used for Caller-Pays-Airtime, I think that the cellular customers _STILL_ have a "POTS" or "geographically-based" NPA-NXX telephone number. They don't have to give that number out to anyone else if they don't want to. But if they won't be paying incoming airtime, they could always give out the "paired" 600 number for people to call them. But some problems with Caller-Pays-Cellular in the NANP, particularly in the US, but also could extend to Canada ... Long Distance to a cellular -- exactly how is this going to be billed, and how could potentially GOUGING rates be BLOCKED from access (with special NPA-NXX codes) by the calling party ... Are there going to be "tariffed toll rates" (or whatever discount plan one calls on, and if that discount plan for toll is "unlimited Sprint Weekends", does that mean that calling a long-distance cellular would be FREE?) ... is there going to be toll (if applicable) PLUS a cellular airtime charge? Cellular to Cellular (particularly if each 'local' cellular is on a different cell company); Calling Card use when calling a cellular, either locally or long distance; COCOT payphones (on local calls to a cellular); PBX originating to a cellular (locally), etc. And if this "caller-pays-the-airtime" madness extends here in the US to become the 'norm', Canada now has COCOTS :-( so the problems here can easily extend over the border. When one buys a cellular, they KNOW that there is a potential for paying for incoming airtime. Your cellular number is usually default NON-PUBBED. (I think there are some places which allow you to have your cellular number published in the printed directory, but it would be YOUR decision). Digital cellulars now have inbound Caller-ID, so the cell customer can choose to pick up (and pay airtime) on the call if they choose to. Most (I don't know about all) cellular companies which provide voicemail service on unanswered inbound calls, usually do NOT bill pseudo-airtime for calls to the voice-mail message box -- ONLY on calls where the called party actually answers the call on his cellular. UNLESS there are DEDICATED and user-restrictable NXX c.o.codes within the 'home' NPA code of the cellular having "caller-Pays-airtime", and to call that, one would HAVE to dial _1+_ then the (home) NPA, and then the seven-digit number (with the caller-pays NXX c.o.code in that 7-digit number) ... then I see a MAJOR can of worms opened up. Consumer groups, State Regulatory, etc. are all going to have some things to say about this. And aren't the actual rates for inbound airtime itself going down more and more, anyhow!? I agree with what Robert L. McMillin said in his earlier reply post on this subject - and to me, "Caller-Pays-Airtime" (as the only option) will just REEK of 900, 976, slamming, cramming, COCOTs, gouging operator/card platforms (used by COCOTs and so-called 'hospitality' systems, i.e. Hotel/Motel), etc. However, while it would (IMO) be a waste of numbering/code resources, it if we are going to have "Caller-Pays-Airtime" options (and I would hope this would only be an OPTION), wireless customers could have TWO numbers associated with their phone- one for "Caller-Pays-Airtime", and another (POTS-based) number for them to pay inbound airtime. MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- ------------------------------ From: quonk@my-dejanews.com Subject: Re: You Call, You Pay Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 04:41:11 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion Remember when 500 numbers were first introduced? While phone company operators and sales representatives were still denying that such things existed, the hot-talk and psychic information industries were already busy reformatting their ads to add 500 numbers to the list of 900, 800, 700, and expensive international numbers. If this comes true, I predict there will promptly be $4.99 per minute caller-pays numbers being marketed by resellers. And through the miracle of call forwarding, the psychics and hot babes won't even have to carry a cellular phone with them. (And yes it is possible to forward multiple calls simultaneously.) I also predict that businesses, hotels, payphones, and, ironically, other cell-phones will almost universally be blocked from placing these calls, just as 900 numbers are today. I am really, really tired of having my home phone bill be the private piggy bank of every slammer, crammer, psychic, and pornographer. Rates and charges for all sorts of services are not readily accessible to the public -- unless you happen to live in Washington DC and have time to browse through the FCC reading room during business hours. Even if there is a warning announcement at the beginning of the call, this is insufficient to protect the person paying the bill. End of rant. ------------------------------ From: jwleblanc@my-dejanews.com (John LeBlanc) Subject: Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 13:25:11 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Monty Solomon : > I have always believed that as long as we are able to identify *who* > sent the email -- a legitmate and meaningful identification of the > user or at the very least the site where it originated -- that we as > users can deal with the rest of the problem. If the government wants > to have more laws -- and don't they always? -- then it should > be sufficient to amend existing laws pertaining to paper mail to > include email and let it go at that. I wholeheartedly agree that clear identification of electronic mail senders would be a good thing. I very much disagree that simply being able to identify the sender should be sufficient in order to deal with the rest of the problem. I generally have no problem identifying the sender; afterall, UCE is usually commercial in nature and therefore provides some mechanism (email, phone, carrier pigeon) in order to respond via telephone or electronic mail. This is not the problem. During the course of several years now I have yet to put a noticable dent in the volume of UCE I receive by dealing "with the rest of the problem" after I've identified the entity who has cost me more resources to receive something I did not ask to receive. But this gets away from the meat of the matter; who bears the cost of UCE? I am astonished that it seems so difficult for some people to grasp the notion that postal mail and electronic mail are transported (and paid for) based on two entirely different models. The junk mail I receive daily in my U.S. Postal mailbox has been paid for by the sender. (I'll rot in hell before I'll pay postage-due junk mail...) The entire cost -- with the exception of the labor I expend to extract my mail from the mailbox -- is born on the shoulders of the sender. The vast majority of costs relative to UCE, however, is born on the shoulders of pipe-owners and recipients. That is a phenomenally flawed method. > Add to that something saying that > users who deliberatly falsify their identity and system admins who > refuse to take reasonable efforts to stop this from happening after > being notifed of such a user will be punished. I should think this is already being done. Backbone providers, thankfully, have begun to back up AUPs to which downstream customers sometimes grudgingly agree. Some ISPs are actually applying the articles of their own AUPs -- when they bother to have them at all -- and cleaning up their own backyard when someone complains. (UU.net comes immediately to mind.) > I am not saying anything that is new or not frequently in practice > now. If anything I would simply codify the requirement for identifica- > tion of and absolute recourse to users who send massive amounts of > unsolicited email, then let the net community deal with that user. > To protect the privacy rights of all users, some threshold would have > to be crossed in terms of the volume of mail sent out before a demand > could be made to identify the user's actual name, etc. PAT] I disagree with the notion that "massive amounts" should have any place in this. If I receive one copy of UCE, that's all that matters to me. That an additional ten, one hundred, or one million additional copies were also sent out to other recipients has no bearing on whether the email was UCE or not. Identification used to be a simple matter of fingering an account. If memory serves, it was first primarily sandbox electronic communications services -- Compuserve, Genie, Prodigy, and then America Online -- who opened gateways to the Internet without providing a path to clearly identifying message originators. Not that that even matters, since I don't believe it's identifying the sender that is the problem. See my thoughts on that above. As it stands, there is in place now nothing that explicitly regulates sending UCE. Even if congress tacks (tax?) onto existing paper-based communications laws the addition of electronic communications, it still misses the mark. (And I don't believe that's a good idea anyway.) The models aren't the same. And there is no existing sufficient recourse. I hardly consider one ISP shutting down an account a sufficient recoursive action when the offender can within minutes open another account and again begin spamming. The Internet community has been wholey unable to either put down, or even stem the incoming tide (tidal wave?) of UCE. In our society -- United States of America -- imposing on the rights of others carries with it a penalty. When my right not to be bothered by UCE is violated, I expect the penalty for that to be compensatory as well as punitive. It's when spammers get hit by punitive judgements, I assure you a replacement model of transporting spam, one which shifts the costs and attendant responsibilities squarely onto the shoulders of those to whom it belongs, will take the place of the one we now have. It continues to amuse me to read of the "First Amendment rights" of spammers when the rights of recipients are clearly ignored. John LeBlanc jwleblanc (at) my-dejanews.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One major problem with the First Amendment -- and I have said in these columns over the years that the First Amendment really is a nuisance -- is deciding where my rights end and your rights begin. In now over two hundred years, that never has been solved to everyone's satisfaction. Why don't we just get rid of it entirely; that will give us one less thing to worry and argue about. I could use a vacation anyway. If you are not sure how well this fascinating new idea of mine would work out, then let's have a trial period to see. Would you like to be one of the beta-testers? PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: James D. Wilson Subject: Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 06:24:43 -1000 Pat, The problem with making the same laws which apply to regular mail apply to Unsolicited Bulk Email is that the sender of regular mail bears the cost of the mailing whereas the recipient of spam (and the intermediary networks) have to pay for the costs of sending the spam. This cost shifting simply is not fair. This is why laws against spam are being passed and why there is a strong move to criminalize spam. Spam is theft of service, trespassing, and in the case of fraudulent headers or content, fraud. A better extension of law would be to expand the junk fax law to apply to unsolicited bulk email and to attach criminal penalties so that the government can act to shut down the "professional spammers" (is that an oxymoron?) In other words, make it illegal to send unsolicited advertisements where there is no pre-existing business relationship and allow the individuals to take the spammers to court and win judgments against the offenders. The only thing that will make spammers stop their network abuse is to make the cost and risks of this behavior outweigh the potential profit. So long as they can pay $20 for a throwaway dialup account and $79.95 for "millions of targeted addresses" they will continue to abuse networks and users. Unfortunately we can no longer depend on the ISP's to "play fair." There are many examples of networks who either refuse to do anything about spammers on their networks or delay it for month after month claiming "we are working on it." Sadly some of the worst offenders (IMHO) are the biggest players such as Sprint, AT&T, and UU.Net. Make it illegal and the networks will be forced to act responsibly instead of continuing to profit from the abuse of others. James D. Wilson "non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem" William of Ockham (1285-1347/49) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #22 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Feb 26 15:42:42 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA21597; Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:42:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:42:42 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199902262042.PAA21597@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #23 TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Feb 99 15:42:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 23 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Monty Solomon) Mobile Phone Outage Tied to Changeover (Stan Schwartz) Book Review: "Poser's Guide to the Internet and World Wide Web" (R. Slade) FCC Rules ISP Calls Are Long-Distance in Nature (James D. Wilson) Re: FCC Rules ISP Calls Are Long-Distance in Nature (Nathan Stratton) Re: FCC Rules ISP Calls Are Long-Distance in Nature (Dan Hollis) Long Island, NY to Get New Area Code (Keith Knipschild) Need Help With Erlang Calculations (DigitalOx) Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime (Eric Bohlman) Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime (John Leblanc) Last Laugh! Russians Bomb Sanford's Company (John Eichler) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 18:11:26 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990224.wcintelsec.htm By James Niccolai InfoWorld Electric PALM SPRINGS, CALIF. -- Concerns over a unique serial number that will be used into the circuitry of every Pentium III processor continue to plague Intel two days before the new chip is due to hit the streets. In the latest turn of events, a programmer at a German computer publication, Computer Technology or c't, claimed Tuesday to have devised a method of activating and reading the serial number without the computer user's knowledge or consent. "Contrary to Intel's description so far, the system architecture allows for individual identification by software tricks," according to a statement posted on the publication's Web site. Intel says it needs to know more about the proposed hack before it can comment on its validity. But officials at the Intel Developer Forum here Wednesday acknowledged that its processor's serial number is not immune to the efforts of a skilled hacker. "As is the case with any software program, people with malicious intent could hack into it," said George Alfs, program manager for the PC Trades division at Intel. "But it's very unclear what they did. We'd like to understand from their technical people how they claim this can be done." Negative publicity surrounding the serial number has generated a big headache for Intel on the eve of the Pentium III's launch. The company has said it will spend more than $300 million in advertising alone to promote the new chip, which at its initial launch speed of 500MHz will be its fastest processor to date. Intel maintains that the serial number will be a big plus for users by providing enhanced security for Internet activities. The serial number will provide an additional way to identify the parties in a transaction, and give network managers a way to keep track of computer assets in a corporate network, Intel said. But civil rights groups including the American Civil Liberties Union have bristled at the implications of having a unique identification number attached to every user, and say the idea represents a threat to privacy. They argue that the uniquely identifiable number will allow marketing firms, the government, and others to track a user's movements on the Internet and possibly gain other information about Web surfers. Intel has said users will be able to download a software control utility from its Web site allowing them enable and disable the serial number at will. The software also will be available from PC makers either pre-installed on computers or on CDs, according to Tom Waldrop, an Intel spokesman. Bowing to pressure, the company reversed earlier plans and said the control utility will be distributed so that it sets the serial number in the "disabled" position. According to Intel, once the serial number is deactivated it can only be switched back on again by rebooting the machine, making it more difficult for a hacker to activate the serial number without the user's knowledge. Not according to the German magazine. "This description has proved wrong," the statement on c't's Web site asserts. "The processor expert of c't magazine, Andreas Stiller, has figured out a procedure to switch on the command for reading out the serial number by software." According to published reports, Stiller's method uses an applet that can be sent to a user's computer over the Internet, and takes advantage of the Pentium III's power-saving "deep sleep" mode. This could allow a hacker to read user identification numbers without their knowledge. Because the deep sleep mode can result in a hard reset, or reboot, of the computer, this can offer an opportunity for the serial number to be turned on, according to Waldrop. However, the control utility checks the status of the serial number every 15 seconds and resets it to "disable" if that is the user's preference, he said. "There are software compromises depending on how the software solution is implemented, particularly in power management," acknowledged Pat Gelsinger, general manager of Intel's platform products division. Intel officials Wednesday said they had managed to contact a representative at c't, who apparently told them that the hack they described has been shown to work in theory but has not actually been demonstrated. c't could not be contacted Wednesday to confirm this. "I don't think they've actually [hacked the serial number]," Waldrop said. In part because of criticisms that the control utility could be vulnerable to a computer hacker, Intel devised a second, additional method by which the serial number can be disabled. It takes the form of an on/off switch that can be buried in the BIOS of a PC. The BIOS is the program that runs when a system is first booted up. However, while Intel is recommending that PC makers include the BIOS switch in systems they ship, it can't guarantee they all will. "Many of them already have included it," Alfs said. In addition, because the BIOS switch requires a greater level of technical knowhow for users to operate, the company is recommending that PC makers who do include the BIOS switch set it to the "on" position, so that users who want to take advantage of the processor serial number do not have to fiddle around with the BIOS on their new system. The upshot is that when Pentium III systems hit the shelves this week, some -- but not all -- will be equipped with a BIOS switch that allows users to disable the serial number -- if they know how. Intel Corp., in Santa Clara, Calif., can be reached at www.intel.com. James Niccolai is a San Francisco correspondent for the IDG News Service, an InfoWorld affiliate. Ephraim Schwartz, an editor at large for Infoworld, and Elinor Millsof the IDG News Service contributed to this story. Please direct your comments to InfoWorld Deputy News Editor, Carolyn April Copyright ) 1999 InfoWorld Media Group Inc. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 21:18:02 PST From: Stan Schwartz Reply-To: stannc.noispam@noispam.yahoo.com Subject: Mobile Phone Outage Tied to Changeover (The Charlotte Observer, 02/25/99) Service restored, but some customers' bills may rise By DAVID BORAKS Staff Writer About 15,000 mobile phone customers in a five-county area including Statesville and Concord had their service switched to a new provider last Friday, but many didn't discover the change until their phones stopped working over the weekend. The service problems were the first big sign for many customers that a new provider had replaced Bell Atlantic Mobile as their mobile phone carrier in Iredell, Cabarrus, Rowan, Davie and Stanly counties. The trouble and change in companies left customers angry, with some complaining that Cellular One told them it will not honor all of Bell Atlantic's discount rate plans, even when customers signed 12-month contracts. The new provider is Bravo Cellular, a group of private investors in the Concord-Salisbury area, which operates under the Cellular One brand name. ``Unfortunately, this isn't the way we wanted to enter this market,'' said Linda Jensen, a spokeswoman for PC Management, a Fort Myers, Fla., company that Bravo has hired to manage service in the territory. She said service had been fully restored by Wednesday. Last Friday, when Bell Atlantic engineers turned off their service, Cellular One's service was nowhere to be found. ``When I went to use the phone last Friday to call my wife, ... it didn't work,'' said Russell Paterson, a Concord resident and longtime Bell Atlantic customer. To make matters worse, when Paterson visited the Cellular One retail store in Salisbury, he was told his rates were going up. ``What I (had) from Bell Atlantic, they can't even come close to offering,'' Paterson said. ``They're charging me $10 more a month, 5 cents more a minute and they cut (the amount of) my (free) airtime.'' Jensen said Cellular One/Bravo would honor Bell Atlantic Mobile contracts, though not necessarily the prices they contain. She said the vast majority of customers will get more favorable rates in the switch, though Cellular One/Bravo will not honor some lower promotional rates Bell Atlantic had promised customers in exchange for contracts. Jensen blamed the weekend network troubles on unspecified technical problems that arose after control of the service was shifted from Bell Atlantic's Charlotte switching center to the Cellular One/Bravo switch in Salisbury. A switch is the system's brains, directing traffic on the wireless phone network. The change in telephone companies is the result of a process that began more than a decade ago with a dispute over who should be granted the cellular phone license for the five-county area. In October, with the dispute resolved, the Federal Communications Commission issued the license to Bravo. Bell Atlantic then sought to buy the license so it could add the territory permanently to its growing license holdings in the Carolina. ``We attempted, with an extremely attractive offer, to buy the market from Bravo Cellular,'' said Jerry Fountain, BellAtlantic Mobile's Southeastern vice president in Greenville, S.C. When Bravo refused the offer, Bell Atlantic was obligated under FCC rules to sell its subscriber base to Bravo at cost -- the amount it paid to acquire the customers. Bravo also bought 10 Bell Atlantic cellular towers in the region, along with conventional cellular telephone antennas and equipment on them. Bravo did not by the advanced digital mobile phone equipment Bell Atlantic also was using and is not offering the more advanced service. Meanwhile, both Bell Atlantic and Cellular One say they did notify customers the change was coming. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something is missing here. When a company sells its business, for whatever reason, something has to be done with its outstanding obligations. It can sell both its assets and liabilities (the purchaser would 'buy' the liabilities if there was an extremely attractive reason for doing so) or the seller can pass the assets only while remaining obligated to satisfy its liabilties. In no case can the seller go poof and say the liabilities no longer exist. That is considered fraud. Either the buyer gets the liabilities or the seller retains them. So Bravo says they are buying the customer base but have no intention of honoring the promises made to customers by the seller (in other words, the liabilities). Seller remains responsible in that case. The value of Bravo's new possession (customer base) comes as a direct result of seller's promises to customers, based on seller's reputation in the community, etc. Either Bravo must honor those promises made by seller or seller must arrange an adjustment of some kind. I think customers need to find an attorney who is experienced with class actions and demand that someone give them what they were promised as an inducement for obtaining their business in the first place. Even if seller had something in contracts with customer saying that they reserved the right to renege on all their contracts and promises, etc, there still is usually some period of time given to customers to make other arrangements as desired, for example a single billing period. Yes, I definitly think an attorney needs to hold Bravo's feet to the fire on this and tell them they will honor the customer base intact, with commitments, etc or they will get sued. Naturally, Bell should be named as a defendant also, so the court can decide who is responsible for what. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 07:58:40 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Poser's Guide to the Internet and World Wide Web" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKPSRSGD.RVW 990126 "Poser's Guide to the Internet and World Wide Web", James Gaskin, 1998, 0-9665370-3-3, U$9.95/C$12.95 %A James Gaskin author@posersguide.com %C 3817 Yellowstone, Irving, TX 75062 %D 1998 %G 0-9665370-3-3 %I Ruby Moon Press %O U$9.95/C$12.95 rubybooks@aol.com %P 111 p. %T "Poser's Guide to the Internet and World Wide Web" The computer world spawns more "instant experts" than any other field of human endeavour with the possible exception of child-rearing, and most such posers are intensely irritating to those who do know what's going on. So why do I applaud Gaskin's reference work for them? For one thing, as the title would suggest, it's funny. Mostly the rolling eyes muttering "how true, how true" variety of funny, but very funny nonetheless. To go further, I have to explain the book. This volume is actually a dictionary. A dictionary is funny? Yes, when each definition (one to a page) is defined, in turn, by a guru, a "cheerleader," and a cynic. (These "experts" have been graphically personified by Randy Jones, and I was please to see, however briefly, the return of Karl's konsultees.) The guru, as the front cover states, gives you the facts that are nice, but rarely helpful. For the cheerleader, the net and all its works are wonderful. But it is the cynics who tell you what these bits of technobabble and manajargon mean. Gaskin casts and informed, and generally jaundiced, eye on the technical "hot buttons" of the day. In fact, while there is a lot of fun in the text, there is a lot of information as well, and you *can* learn a lot very quickly, if you want to be a poser. In fact, I can think of a lot of executives who I wish would spend about an hour with this volume. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKPSRSGD.RVW 990126 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Comp Sec Weekly: http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/computer_security Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: James D. Wilson Subject: FCC Rules ISP Calls Are Long-Distance in Nature Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 19:11:07 -1000 http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990225.enfccisp.htm By Nancy Weil InfoWorld Electric Posted at 10:58 AM PT, Feb 25, 1999 In a long-anticipated vote, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on Thursday decided that dial-up Internet calls are interstate in nature and not local. The ruling overturns state decisions holding that dial-up calls to the Internet are local. The decision also could mean that local phone companies will be able to assess usage-sensitive access charges on ISPs, the FCC suggested in a statement Thursday regarding its vote. Without the so-called "Enhanced Service Provider Exemption," consumers might have to pay per-minute fees for dialing into the Internet on local lines, however not all Internet access calls necessarily will be charged at long distance rates. James D. Wilson "non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem" William of Ockham (1285-1347/49) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 00:27:02 EST From: Nathan Stratton Subject: Re: FCC Rules ISP Calls Are Long-Distance in Nature On Thu, 25 Feb 1999, James D. Wilson wrote: > The ruling overturns state decisions holding that dial-up calls to > the Internet are local. The decision also could mean that local phone > companies Actually that is not correct, the FCC did say that they think that ISP calls are interstate (they are crazy), but the above is not true. The FCC did not take away power from the states that have ruled on this issue, they also said that this finding will NOT affect any current agreements. I had 3 of my CLEC customers sign agreements this week, so they are happy about that part. :-) I was not sure if I should make this post, but I did so because the information was not correct. Any further post on this issue should be taken up on list more suited to this topic. You may want to check out my CLECLIST is found at http://www.robotics.net/clec/cleclist.html or other lists where this topic is being discussed. Anyway, I think this is a major event and something that ISPs need to look at, but it is not a operational issue. Check out the new CLEC mailing list at http://www.robotics.net/clec Nathan Stratton Telecom & ISP Consulting http://www.robotics.net nathan@robotics.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 21:50:07 PST From: Dan Hollis Subject: Re: FCC Rules ISP Calls Are Long-Distance in Nature On Thu, 25 Feb 1999, James D. Wilson wrote: > http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990225.enfccisp.htm Sigh. Another clue free reporter. Why dont they ever read the *text* of the ruling before writing a blathering article. Dan ------------------------------ From: Keith Knipschild Subject: Long Island, NY to get New Area Code Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 19:46:33 -0500 The staff of the New York Public Service Commission is recommending an ''overlay'' method, meaning that a person or business asking for a new phone number on Long Island would be assigned a number with the new area code. Current customers would keep their existing 516 code and seven-digit telephone numbers under the plan. Here is the News Story Links: http://www.newsday.com/news/n4thu.htm http://www.dps.state.ny.us/516 Keith Email: Mailto:Keith@Knip.com Web::: Http://www.Knip.com ------------------------------ Date: 26 Feb 1999 17:46:23 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: digitalox@aol.com (DigitalOx) Subject: Need Help With Erlang Calculations Hi, I'm trying to write a progam that calulates the number of trunks need for a desired grade of service and Erlangs using Erlang B. All the equations I've found don't seem to solve for the # of trunks, and I can' t get it (number of trunks) into the left hand side of the equation because my math isn't so great. Anybody know how? The Erlang B equation I have is n 2 n Eb = (A / n !) / ( 1 + A + A / 2! + A / n! ) where Eb is the grade of service, A is the mean of offered traffic, and n is the number trunks. ------------------------------ From: Eric Bohlman Subject: Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime Organization: ICGNetcom Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 01:23:19 GMT James D. Wilson wrote: > The problem with making the same laws which apply to regular mail > apply to Unsolicited Bulk Email is that the sender of regular mail > bears the cost of the mailing whereas the recipient of spam (and the > intermediary networks) have to pay for the costs of sending the spam. > This cost shifting simply is not fair. This is why laws against spam > are being passed and why there is a strong move to criminalize spam. Furthermore, the amount of postal junk mail anybody receives is limited by the fact that each junk letter costs money to produce as well as send, which gives marketers a *strong* incentive to limit their mailings to likely prospects. Let's take a non-commercial example here: the mailings of a political campaign. If I'm running a campaign for a candidate for alderman in Chicago's 13th ward, I've got a strong incentive to make sure that any campaign literature gets mailed only to addresses in the 13th ward. Mail to addresses in the 10th ward, to addresses in Joliet, or to addresses in Seattle costs the campaign money without making the candidate more electable, so I go out of my way *not* to send literature to such addresses. But with e-mail, sending out a million promotional e-mails costs me no more than sending out ten. Therefore, if I were to send out unsolicited campaign e-mails, I would have *no economic incentive* to go through my mailing list and exclude addresses for people outside the 13th ward. Doing so would cost me time and money. It would be easier and cheaper for me to shotgun-blast my campaign message all over the world. The fact that 10,000 of the messages land in Seattle doesn't matter to me. You can see that unsolicited e-mail has a scalability problem that unsolicited postal mail doesn't. The proportionality of the cost of postal mailing to the number of recipients keeps postal junk mail from overwhelming the transport mechanism. But e-mail doesn't have any such intrinsic limits; the only limits to the volume of unsolicited e-mail are either the physical (bandwidth) limits of the transport network, or regulatory limits. Increased bandwidth won't help, because UCE will simply scale up to match the increased limits. ------------------------------ From: jwleblanc@my-dejanews.com (John LeBlanc) Subject: Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 06:31:27 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to jwleblanc@my-dejanews.com (John LeBlanc): > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One major problem with the First > Amendment -- and I have said in these columns over the years that > the First Amendment really is a nuisance -- is deciding > where my rights end and your rights begin. In now over two hundred > years, that never has been solved to everyone's satisfaction. Why > don't we just get rid of it entirely; that will give us one less > thing to worry and argue about. I could use a vacation anyway. If > you are not sure how well this fascinating new idea of mine would > work out, then let's have a trial period to see. Would you like > to be one of the beta-testers? PAT] Would I like to be a beta-tester for your new-fangled idea? Funny. It feels as though I have been. :) Having in my post yesterday exercised several demons and not a few minor irritating spirits, I won't rehash. And, while I agree that the line delineating my rights and your rights seems to be a difficult one to define, how about a no-fly zone whereby mutual permission is required before invading the other's email box? John LeBlanc jwleblanc (at) my-dejanews.com ------------------------------ From: jeichl - John Eichler Subject: Last Laugh! Russians Bomb Sanford's Company Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:06:53 -0600 Pat, There is a cute cartoon strip on the web that you might enjoy. Recently (this week) they have had a story line of the Russians trying to nuke the headquarters of Sanford Wallace's new company. (see Feb 23rd) It's a great SPAM story. http://www.userfriendly.org/cartoons/archives/99feb/19990223.html You can go forward and backward from there. Enjoy, John Eichler [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for the reference. Everyone, let's go check it out now! See you again next week! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #23 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 1 13:30:01 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA17289; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 13:30:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 13:30:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903011830.NAA17289@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #24 TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 Mar 99 13:30:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 24 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada), March 1, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) UCLA Short Course on "Communications Networking" (Bill Goodin) Re: Need Help With Erlang Calculations (B.L. Bodnar) Re: Need Help With Erlang Calculations (Jerry Harder) Is Personal Information at Risk With Pentium III? (Monty Solomon) CDT to File Complaint Over Intel ID Chip (Monty Solomon) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Thomas A. Horsley) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Donald Seeley) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 10:59:47 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada), March 1, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 172: March 1, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Newbridge Sues WIC Over Lost Contract ** Peeters Founds Data Collection Outsourcer ** NBTel Offers Bundled Long Distance Package ** MaxLink Sets Midsummer Launch for LMCS ** MetroNet Plans 320 Gbps Backbone ** CRTC Denies Ontario Independents on CAT ** Servicesoft, Pyderion Ally for Web Call Centers ** SNC-Lavalin Takes Stake in Bell's Expertech ** Ericsson, Cantel Build Wireless Test Center ** BC Tel Mobility Opens Online Store ** Unions Condemn Bell's Operator Spin-Off ** Cuba Cuts Phone Links to U.S. ** Horhota Takes Helm at Cannect ** New CEO at Plaintree Systems ** Financial Reports Clearnet MetroNet Newbridge ** Bonus Surveys Future of Telecom ============================================================ NEWBRIDGE SUES WIC OVER LOST CONTRACT: Newbridge Networks has asked the Ontario Court to force WIC Connexus to honor a contract for purchase of Newbridge LMCS equipment. WIC, which has now signed Cisco as supplier, says it will "vigorously defend itself." (See Telecom Update #170) PEETERS FOUNDS DATA COLLECTION OUTSOURCER: Jan Peeters, the co-founder of Fonorola Inc. and its CEO until it was bought last year by Call-Net, has launched a new venture, Olameter Inc. Olameter will offer remote meter-reading services to electricity and other utilities. NBTEL OFFERS BUNDLED LONG DISTANCE PACKAGE: NBTel has the CRTC's okay to offer a package of 600 off-peak long distance minutes within Canada together with local service and a selection of calling features. Price: $54.95 to $59.95 a month. (Telecom Order 99-149) http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0149.htm MAXLINX SETS MIDSUMMER LAUNCH FOR LMCS: MaxLink Communications, which holds LMCS (fixed wireless) licenses in 33 Canadian centers, has set midsummer as the launch date for commercial service in Montreal, Ottawa, and Calgary. MaxLink will use Newbridge TDMA network equipment, which can serve many customers on a single frequency. METRONET PLANS 320 Gbps BACKBONE: MetroNet has signed Nortel Networks to provide the carrier's national and cross-border fiber-optic network with D-WDM equipment that will transmit at up to 320 Gbps per fiber strand. CRTC DENIES ONTARIO INDEPENDENTS ON CAT: Back in August 1997, the Ontario Telephone Association filed for a Carrier Access Tariff of 12 cents/minute for 1996. CRTC Telecom Order 99-148 notes a pattern of rising excess expenses, denies the tariff, and asks the independent telcos to refile. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0148.htm SERVICESOFT, PYDERION ALLY FOR WEB CALL CENTERS: Servicesoft Technologies, which makes Web-enabled call center software, and Montreal-based Pyderion Contact Technologies, specialists in call center management information, have formed a co-marketing alliance. ** Servicesoft was formed this month through a merger of Balisoft Technologies and Massachusetts-based ServiceSoft Corp, with Balisoft's Mark Skapinker as CEO. (See Telecom Update #140) SNC-LAVALIN TAKES STAKE IN BELL'S EXPERTECH: Montreal-based engineering firm SNC-Lavalin has formed an alliance with Expertech Network Installation, Bell Canada's subsidiary for wireline network construction. SNC-Lavalin will take a 25% stake in Expertech. ERICSSON, CANTEL BUILD WIRELESS TEST CENTER: Ericsson Communications and Rogers Cantel are building a wireless testbed in Ericsson's Montreal research center to test "Third Generation" wireless data services at up to 384 Kbps. BC TEL MOBILITY OPENS ONLINE STORE: BC Tel Mobility's Web site now includes an online store, where customers can buy a cellphone or pager with three-day delivery. UNIONS CONDEMN BELL'S OPERATOR SPIN-OFF: The National Alliance of Communications Unions has condemned Bell Canada's decision to hand over operator services to a "U.S.-based company." (See Telecom Update #166) CUBA CUTS PHONE LINKS TO U.S.: Since November, several U.S. phone companies have halted international call payments to the Cuban phone company because of a lawsuit. Cuba has now suspended direct dial phone service with these companies; AT&T says calls are being rerouted through third countries. HORHOTA TAKES HELM AT CANNECT: George Horhota, former CFO of ACC TelEnterprises, has been named President and CEO of Cannect Communications. NEW CEO AT PLAINTREE SYSTEMS: Jay Richardson, a chartered accountant, has been named CEO of Plaintree Systems, with the task of locating new equity for the Stittsville, Ont. switch maker. Previous CEO Colin Beaumont stays on as Chief Technology Officer. FINANCIAL REPORTS: ** Clearnet Communications' 1998 revenue was $228 Million, up from $98 Million the previous year; the net loss for 1998 was $544 Million. Average Revenue Per Unit: $58.42/month; subscriber turnover: 1.92%/month. ** MetroNet Communications reports fourth-quarter revenue of $35 Million, up 21% from the previous quarter. Losses for the quarter were $77 Million. MetroNet had 59,000 lines installed at year end, 51% more than three months previously. ** Newbridge Networks recorded sales of $451 Million for the quarter ended January 31, a 26% increase from last year. ATM orders rose 45% from the previous quarter. Net earnings were $120 Million. BONUS SURVEYS FUTURE OF TELECOM: "In the next decade, the telecom industry will be turned on its head, twisted out of shape, and completely transformed," say Ian and Lis Angus. Their report, "Angus's Laws for Understanding and Surviving (and Possibly Profiting From) the New Telecom," is included in "Tips, Tricks and Traps," a bonus sent to all new subscribers to Telemanagement. ** Tips, Tricks & Traps also includes "How the Internet Is Shaking Up Telecom," by Ian Angus, and 20 other reports and resources for Canadian telecom professionals. http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm-ttt.html ** To subscribe to Telemanagement (and receive Tips, Tricks and Traps) call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225 or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course on "Communications Networking" Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 14:57:07 -0800 On May 24-28, 1999, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Communications Networking: Local, Metropolitan, and Wide-Area Networks", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Izhak Rubin, PhD, Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA, and Michael A. Erlinger, PhD, Professor, Department of Computer Science, Harvey Mudd College. This course presents the integration of communication, switching, networking, traffic, service, computer engineering, and management principles, and highlights continuing trends in telecommunications network technologies, architectures, planning, management, evaluation and design. Elements essential to the implementation and control of cost-effective, reliable, and responsive telecommunication networks are thoroughly discussed. Key networking implementations and experimentations are presented and evaluated. Test cases involving multimedia networking over FDDI, Ethernet, Token-Ring, TDMA, ALOHA, Wireless, internetworked packet-switched networks, and B-ISDN ATM networks are demonstrated using the IRI Planyst program. The course is designed for computer, telecommunications, and system engineers; managers; system and business analysts; project leaders, consultants, MIS persons, and scientists seeking: o Principles of modern computer communications and telecommunications networking and elements of the evolution in networking technologies, operations and management; o Up-to-date architectural, planning, management, modeling, performance evaluations and design considerations for communications networks; o Present, proposed, and future developments in high-speed local and wide area telecommunications and computer communications networks. UCLA Extension has presented this highly successful short course since 1982. The course fee is $1595, which includes all course materials. These materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ From: bohdan@ihgp4.ih.lucent.com (B.L. Bodnar) Subject: Re: Need Help With Erlang Calculations Date: 1 Mar 1999 17:12:53 GMT Organization: Lucent Technologies In article , DigitalOx wrote: > I'm trying to write a progam that calulates the number of trunks need > for a desired grade of service and Erlangs using Erlang B. All the > equations I've found don't seem to solve for the # of trunks, and I > can't get it (number of trunks) into the left hand side of the > equation because my math isn't so great. Anybody know how? The Erlang > B equation I have is > n 2 n > Eb = (A / n !) / ( 1 + A + A / 2! + A / n! ) > where Eb is the grade of service, A is the mean of offered traffic, > and n is the number trunks. I posted an algorithmic approach to this problem about a year ago. The approach I developed (which has probably been "developed" by countless other engineers) is to go back to the fundamentals of the derivation of this equation. Here's an outline: Assume interarrival times and service times are exponentially distributed (it can be shown that the latter assumption is too strict). Let P(0) be the probability that no trunks are busy, P(1) that only one trunk is busy, P(2) that only two are busy, etc. Let "r" be the mean arrival rate and "u" be the mean service rate. The local balance equations (derived from the Markov chain describing this system) are: r*P(0) = u*P(1) r*P(1) = 2*u*P(2) . . . r*P(n-1) = n*u*P(n) P(n) is your blocking probability. Here's one possible attack: given P(n) (but not n), r, and u, pick a non-zero value for P(0), pick a value for n, and recursively compute P(1), P(2), etc. Add all the P(i)s together (this is the normalizing constant) and divide the P(n) by this constant. You've now computed your blocking probability. If it's too high, increase n and start again. I've successfully used this method for values of n going to around 30k. My former office mate used this approach successfully for much higher values. Some parting thoughts ... - Expect to see floating point problems. There are tricks for working around them (e.g., logarithmic transformations, resetting the P(0) "seed", etc.). - Do all calculations in at least double precision Best wishes, Bohdan Bodnar bbodnar@lucent.com ------------------------------ From: Jerry Harder Subject: Re: Need Help With Erlang Calculations Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 06:00:55 GMT Organization: @Home Network There is no closed form solution. Instead, try a certain number of trunks. If the GOS is too good, reduce by one and calaulate the new blockage. If the GOS is too bad, add a trunk and calulate the new blockage. This is called "trial and error" or an iterative method. If you have huge amounts of traffic, hundreds of Erlangs, you can easily guess a very good starting point. Good luck, Jerry Harder ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 02:34:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Is Personal Information at Risk With Pentium III? http://www.seattletimes.com/news/technology/html98/paul_19990228.html Is personal information at risk with Pentium III? Do you need to worry about the identification code in Intel's new Pentium III chip? Here's the situation: The new chip, released Friday and backed by a $300 million promotion campaign, is an incremental upgrade of Intel's successful Pentium line. The III speeds audio and video processing, including 3-D graphics and games. It is not a huge advance, but it does push leading-edge computing forward. The problem is that the III also contains a software feature called the processor serial number, or PSN. Each chip has a unique PSN. Which means that the computer you buy can be linked electronically to your name and identity through communications over a network or the Internet. Intel did this in an attempt to make it easier for corporations and businesses to track inventory and computer usage. Intel also hoped PSNs would smooth electronic commerce by helping to verify your identity during Web transactions. The PSN, in other words, adds one more layer to the process of helping to authenticate that you are who you say you are, and that the transaction is valid. Privacy advocates, however, see the PSN as one more potential hole in the dike protecting you from telemarketers and Big Brother. Your unique PSN could, if collated with other information about you, tell a lot not only about how you use your computer, but also about your general preferences, attitudes and lifestyle traits. Because the privacy issue is so emotional, misconceptions are already arising about PSNs. Two issues need to be addressed up front. The PSN is not a flaw, as was the mathematical bug in the original Pentium four years ago. Nor is the PSN a back door or tunnel to accessing remotely the actual contents of your hard disk or information otherwise stored on your computer. The PSN merely identifies your computer with a unique number. Why did Intel bother? The PSN is a boon to corporations and large enterprises that need to keep track of thousands of PCs. Bar codes, serial numbers and other identifiers have to be read by hand (or device) individually, by eyesight. The PSN enables an information director to locate in seconds an individual computer, via the network, that otherwise might take weeks to track down. For you and me, the PSN offers a quick and easy way for a Web site to match us with our PC, one more method to make sure the transaction is legitimate. As for the risks, a PSN over time could be used to create a user profile. But it would take some doing. A lot of vendors would have to get together and compare PSNs. Vendors could also do this with credit-card transactions. Both processes are pretty unwieldy. To address potential privacy concerns, Intel is providing several options. One is for the user to be notified, and to grant permission, each time the PSN is accessed by a Web site. Another is for the user to disable the PSN feature each time the computer boots up. This can be done through the Windows registry via a utility in the Start menu, and the user will be notified by an icon that the feature is disabled. Finally, Intel is providing information to computer manufacturers and BIOS makers on ways to mask the PSN in setup mode, before the PC is even shipped to a customer. That way, you and I can request a PSN-disabled PC at purchase time. None of these methods is totally foolproof. Hackers can figure out a way to access anything involving software. It might be wise for Intel to consider shipping a version of the Pentium III chip containing no PSN. Until that happens, users need to decide for themselves whether they can live with the feature. Intel is to be credited for handling the PSN controversy far better than the math flaw it had with the original Pentium. The company has been open about its reasons for implementing the feature. Intel has made clear that it will not try to track PSNs. Intel's Web site http://support.intel.com features a helpful FAQ and other information about the PSN. For the contrarian view, http://bigbrotherinside.com offers an overview of opposition to the feature. User Friendly appears Sundays in the Personal Technology section of The Seattle Times. Paul Andrews is a member of The Times' staff. Send e-mail to: pand-new@seatimes.com Copyright 1999 Seattle Times Company ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 02:25:43 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: CDT to File Complaint Over Intel ID Chip http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,1014019,00.html CDT to file complaint over Intel ID chip By Robert Lemos, Maria Seminerio February 26, 1999 12:05 PM ET The Center for Democracy and Technology, a privacy and consumer rights group, said it will file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission on Friday, citing Intel Corp. for unfair trade practices in bringing its processor ID to market. And it claimed that at least one major PC maker, IBM, has agreed to disable the ID technology in Intel's Pentium III microprocessors. "[Intel] has made several claims that we believe are false," said Ari Schwartz, spokesman for the CDT, on Thursday. The group is asking the FTC to take a stance and protect what it believes is an abuse of consumer rights. Details will not be available until Friday, said Schwartz. Also on Thursday, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Junkbusters Corp., and Privacy International on Thursday sent a letter to major OEMs asking them not to ship PC equipped with the new Pentium III. The groups believe the chip, which contains a controversial identification feature, could open up computer makers to litigation by consumers whose privacy is violated, said David Sobel, general counsel for EPIC. Selling PCs while assuring users the ID feature is turned off could be risky for original equipment manufacturers in light of a German computer magazine's recent assertion that the feature is vulnerable to hackers, the letter states. "We believe that such a claim [that the ID feature is turned off] made under current circumstances could constitute a material misrepresentation of the sort prohibited by federal consumer protection laws and regulations," according to the letter, which was sent to the chief executive officers of Dell Computer Corp., Gateway Inc., Compaq Computer Corp., Hewlett-Packard Co. and IBM. "Intel has put the onus on the manufacturers, and that's not a good spot for them to be in," Sobel said. "If Dell sells me a PC and says this feature can't be turned on, and then it is turned on," resulting in a crime such as the theft of a credit card number or Social Security number, "then I'm going to turn around and sue Dell," he said. While Junkbusters.com is asking PC makers to halt shipments, the CDT has merely asked them to turn off the processor ID in the basic system instructions, known as BIOS. Jason Catlett, president of Junkbusters.com, applauded the move as a necessary step in the right direction. "The CDT went an extra step and that forces the FTC to respond with some sort of a ruling," he said. IBM says no ID On Thursday, IBM, in a letter to the CDT, said it would ship its systems with the processor ID turned off in BIOS. "IBM promotes and supports active industry leadership in tackling the privacy issues raised by the growth of the Internet and online commerce as a way to help foster this trust," said the IBM statement. "We lead by example." Following initial complaints about the tracking technology, Intel asked PC makers to turn off the processor using a software utility. But on Wednesday, a German magazine reported that a way had been found to reactivate the processor ID even when a user thinks it has been switched off. "We have spoken with the CDT, and they have some difference in opinion with us," said Intel spokesman George Alfs. "But we have done nothing wrong." The processor ID is a unique 96-bit identifier that has been placed on every Pentium III chip that Intel is now shipping to PC makers. Intel believes the ID is necessary for improved corporate asset tracking, network management, and -- eventually -- e-commerce. The chip maker announced the product "feature" in January at the RSA Data Security Conference. ------------------------------ From: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net (Thomas A. Horsley) Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: 28 Feb 1999 22:44:14 GMT Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services You know, it seems to me ethernet boards have had unique IDs for years and years and years, but no privacy groups ever hollered about that. I think the mistake Intel made was the spin they put on the initial descriptions of the silly ID number -- as a way to track e-commerce activity (a thing most individual consumers don't care about other than the negative big-brother aspects). With ethernet boards, the ID really is a convenience for things like reverse-arp lookups, making it simpler to boot and administer your machine, etc. Intel shouda spun in a different direction :-). >>==>> The *Best* political site >>==+ email: Tom.Horsley@worldnet.att.net icbm: Delray Beach, FL | Free Software and Politics <<==+ ------------------------------ From: Donald Seeley Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: 28 Feb 1999 21:30:17 GMT Organization: EnterAct, L.L.C. Monty Solomon wrote: > http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990224.wcintelsec.htm > By James Niccolai > InfoWorld Electric --- snip - snip --- > Intel has said users will be able to download a software control utility > from its Web site allowing them enable and disable the serial number at > will. The software also will be available from PC makers either > pre-installed on computers or on CDs, according to Tom Waldrop, an Intel > spokesman. Bowing to pressure, the company reversed earlier plans and said > the control utility will be distributed so that it sets the serial number > in the "disabled" position. Are they planning to capture the s/n of the machines that do? Don Seeley Daring Designs Typography - Graphics - Layout http://www.daringdesigns.com/~dschi/ dschi@daringdesigns.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #24 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 1 16:39:11 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA28536; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 16:39:11 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 16:39:11 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903012139.QAA28536@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #25 TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 Mar 99 16:39:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 25 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson FCC Rules Internet Dial-Up Calls Are Interstate Calls (Monty Solomon) Recip Comp: Settled Dust (Jack Decker) Re: Cordless Phone Creates Huge Phone Bill (Alan Boritz) Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime (Alan Boritz) Re: Junk E-Mail Filters Spawn a Suit Against Microsoft (Alan Boritz) Re: WE/AT&T Paint & Process (Andrew Emmerson) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Bill Ranck) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Anthony Naggs) Re: Mobile Phone Outage Tied to Changeover (Eric Bohlman) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 02:06:39 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Rules Internet Dial-Up Calls Are Interstate Calls http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/02/biztech/articles/26access.html By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON -- A computer user's dial-up calls to the Internet are interstate communications subject to federal jurisidiction, federal regulators concluded on Thursday. Until now, Internet dial-ups have been treated as local calls. The Federal Communications Commission insists Thursday's action merely resolves a dispute among phone companies over how to compensate each other for Internet connections and to clarify the role of state and federal regulators. It said the decision won't affect how consumers tap into the Internet or how much they pay. But consumer groups and one FCC commissioner, Harold Furchtgott-Roth, who protested by not participating in the vote, believe the action could inadvertently open the door to higher future charges for Internet access by computer users. Gene Kimmelman, co-director of the Consumers Union's Washington office, said the decision eventually could lead to people paying per-minute rates for using the Internet, just as they now do with long-distance phone calls. But the FCC said its decision preserves an existing provision that exempts Internet service providers, like America Online, from paying per-minute "access" charges to local telephone companies. Long-distance companies now pay these fees, which they pass on to their customers. They account for about 30 cents of every $1 of a long-distance bill. "Consumers are used to dialing a local phone number to get access to the Internet, and they are used to paying that access as a local call," said the FCC's chairman, Bill Kennard. "Nothing that we are doing in this item will change that." George Vradenburg, a senior vice president at AOL, agreed that the decision will have "no effect on Internet charges." But the critics worry that local Bell telephone companies and GTE might use the decision as legal basis to getting a court to overturn the provision that exempts Internet service providers from paying access fees to local phone companies. FCC officials believed nothing in the decision would help the Bells make such a legal case. AOL's Vradenburg said he's not worried. Also as part of the decision, the FCC agreed to phase out, after current contracts expire, hefty fees the Bells and GTE pay smaller local phone companies to route customers' calls to the Internet. The FCC proposed letting states and companies decide how carriers compensate each other in the future. The Bells and GTE praised the idea. Separately, the FCC agreed to release an audit of the five Bell telephone companies showing that $5 billion in equipment can't be accounted for. However, the full results won't be released for at least 10 days. The Bells contend the audit, which was conducted in 1997, is flawed and overestimates missing equipment. FCC officials dispute this. Audit results, the Bells say, will not affect rates directly, but they may have an indirect effect: consumer groups and AT&T are already using the audit to press for lower local and long-distance rates. The chairman of the House Commerce Committee, Thomas Bliley, a Virginia Republican, said "consumers may be paying more on their phone bills" than they should. The FCC intends to seek public comments on the audit, its ramifications and what action, if any, the commission should take. FCC staff recommended, however, that the Bells be required to take write-offs and making accounting corrections. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 16:48:18 -0500 From: Jack Decker Subject: Recip Comp: Settled Dust I saw this on another list and figured it was a much more insightful view of the recent FCC action than what we've been getting from the various media sources: [Begin forwarded message:] Message-ID: <157B3A3601005100@colegate.crblaw.com> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 15:20:00 -0500 From: Chris Savage Sender: Chris Savage Organization: Cole, Raywid & Braverman To: cleclist@robotics.net (CLEC LIST), isp-clec@isp-clec.com, CYBERTELECOM-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM (Telecom Regulation & the Internet), uswisp@lists.nm.org (USWest ISPList) Subject: Recip comp: settled dust Now that I've had a couple of days to think about it (and recover from a killer cold/flu), here are some observations about what the FCC actually did (and didn't do) regarding recip comp: 1. The FCC took away the key ILEC argument against recip comp. The ILECs have been claiming that (a) calls to ISPs are interstate and that therefore, as the night follows the day, (b) there cannot be recip comp associated with those calls. The FCC said that (a) is correct. But it also said that it was just fine for states to have determined (or to determine in the future) that recip comp applies to dial-up calls to ISPs. Therefore the ILECs' syllogism *MUST* be false. On the one hand this ruling gives the ILECs an opening to go back to states and say, "See, you must have been wrong if you said or thought it was intrastate." But in any such proceeding the CLECs can say, "But the FCC clearly thinks it is okay for there to be recip comp even though the calls are interstate." Which will push it back to policy, and when you follow the money, there needs to be some kind of recip comp, otherwise how else is the CLEC to get paid for its switching or equivalent functionality? 2. The FCC shut down CLECs who were playing to "states' rights" sentiments about ISP traffic. The CLECs who were trying to divide the world into an intrastate call to the ISP followed by an interstate information service to "the net" never had a prayer. The FCC was not going to cede jurisdiction over this to the states. The CLECs were, in effect, betting that the states would win in AT&T v. Iowa. Oops. 3. The FCC glossed over how ISPs and the Internet function to reach its result. In the circuit-switched world, one can speak of a "call" going from point A to point B; check out the points, you can determine jurisdiction. This obviously makes no sense in the packet world. Yet the FCC insisted on extending the "call" analogy beyond all recognition, referring to, in effect, a "call" from an end user to a distant web site. No such "call" exists, under any normal definition of "call." This will lead to mischief. The FCC needs to be educated thoroughly and in detail about *what ISPs do.* I am concerned that otherwise there will be looser and looser analogizing to circuit-switched phenomena, which will tend to put ISPs into the role of local and/or long distance telcos. 4. The FCC ignored AT&T v. Iowa. I actually find this to be quite bizarre. Post-AT&T v. Iowa, the FCC could have avoided *all* of this mess by saying: (a) We have the power to say how Section 251(b)(5) applies, no matter how calls to ISPs are classified; (b) we say that states that have decided the issue have done so in a proper exercise of their Section 252 duties; (c) we conclude that some form of compensation for these calls is appropriate -- you guys keep on working out the details; and (d) we will have an NPRM to work out what general guidelines (if any) we want to impose. I suppose, though, that CLECs can at least argue that under AT&T v. Iowa, the FCC's conclusion that (until and unless the FCC orders a contrary rule) states may impose recip comp for ISP calls *despite* their interstate character is itself binding on states. So whatever a state may now do, it may *not* conclude that it lacks the authority to impose recip comp, merely because the calls are interstate. See #1 above. ******* So it's back to litigation. The ILECs will challenge every state decision out there, no doubt continuing to flack their "one call/interstate/can't be recip comp" argument, despite the FCC having concluded that states may impose recip comp, even over parties' objections, on various theories. Some states may be misled. And the FCC rulemaking will meanwhile be pending, threatening to change everything. Is this a great country, or what? ;-) ------------------------------ From: aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Creates Huge Phone Bill Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 10:25:39 -0500 In article , dlore@iname.com wrote: > Can anyone explain to me the following? > I just received an outrageously high phone bill. It is extremely > unlikely that I made all the calls. A friend of mine told me that she > had the same problem -- a very high bill with calls she definitly did > not make. She told me that it most probably had to do with my using a > portable phone inside my house (as oppposed to a phone with a cord > from the handset to the base). She said that somehow someone else's > calls were being charged on my bill as a result of their porta-phone > and my porta-phones airwaves or channels getting mixed up (I live in > an apartment building). You've just experienced the downside of using a cordless device in a crowded area, combined with a cordless phone with no security. > I know that it is possible to eavesdrop on a porta-phone but how > EXACTLY (Please Explain!) is it possible for someone else's calls to > go on my bill. Is it only on outgoing or also incoming calls? Is it > charged even if I only speak for a second or do I have to speak longer > than they speak? You're being charged the full rate, for all calls, because someone is accessing your phone line with a cordless extension, apparently as easily as you. You're liable for the charges, since it was your phone line. The fact that it was a cordless extension is unimportant. It may have been intentional (some people cruise neighborhoods looking for dialtone on a cordless unit so they can place calls on someone else's dime), or it may have been by accident. In any event, the culprit is probably less than 1,000 feet from your cordless base unit. > How can I prevent this? Unplug your cordless phone base unit and throw it in the garbage (no kidding). You need a unit with some (even rudimentary) security. The state-of-the-art cordless phones use spread-spectrum or encryption technology, but I'm not so sure how good they are telling a foreign cordless unit from your own. Go shopping for a good one (after you unplug your cordless base unit) and ask questions. You can expect the sales people to be clueless, so check the manufacturer's web sites for details on this issue. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When the correspondent first wrote about this and I published his letter, he did not indicate the type or model or style of cordless phone in use. For this reason I was not prepared to blame his problem entirely or even partially on the cord- less phone. He may have a relatively good, secure phone. He may be the victim of malicious intent, or a victim of simple carelessness. PAT] ------------------------------ From: aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 10:50:08 -0500 In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/feb99/valaw23.htm > RICHMOND, Va. Legislation that would make it a crime to clog the > Internet with unsolicited junk e-mail cleared the General Assembly and > is on its way to Gov. Jim Gilmore. ... > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So if it becomes illegal to own or use > software which allows the sender of email to conceal his true identity > then what happens to unix admins who have sendmail on their site with > its ability to set -f by (in unix parlance) trusted users? What happens > to those sites which still maintain open mail relays? (Yes, there are > a few) ... I do not think there should be a law against spam as such; > the law should be directed against any email to which the recipient > has no recourse. No, Pat. There are obvious scenarios where concealing identity for adminstration purposes is appropriate and socially acceptable. The lesson here appears to be that if you spam, you will *pay through the nose*, if we can help it. > Existing laws which pertain to sending regular > 'paper' mail should be automatically amended to include email, i.e. > postal fraud; theft or intervention of mail not intended for the > person who 'opens' it, etc. No, Pat. Some of us still have internet accounts that still charge by connect time, so unsolicited would *never* be appropriate or welcome. > I have always believed that as long as we are able to identify *who* > sent the email -- a legitmate and meaningful identification of the > user or at the very least the site where it originated -- that we as > users can deal with the rest of the problem. No, Pat, it's not sufficient. Some people will respond politely to requests to cease their activities, others need a sledge hammer over the head (more than once) before they'll stop. You're never going to convince anyone, beyond clueless AOL junkies, that you have a "right" to access my electronic mailbox, since every piece of junk email you send costs ME money. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I saw nothing in the new Virginia law which allows exemptions for 'obvious scenarios when concealing identity for administrative purposes is acceptable ...' What did I miss? Since when haven't there been dorks perfectly willing to take any new federal law with a few loose ends to it and come up with the most bizzare applications one could think of? Regards your second point, although it may not be totally sufficient, I still see no harm in the government finally admitting that email is becoming just as prevalent as paper mail, and amending existing postal regulations to apply to email, so that in really serious cases of abuse, fraud, etc, we don't have to talk about whether or not a crime was committed 'using the mail'. Does there need to be still more specific law dealing with the peculiar nature of email which does not apply to paper mail? Probably so. Regards your third point, I do not see it as the spammers who are particularly at fault here; it is the way in which the internet and email was developed. The spammers exposed a vulnerability in the net's way of doing things. In the case of the post office (or the US Postal Service if you wish), in theory at least, the sender pays the bill and the recipient pays nothing. The recipient's post office does not have to worry about how *it* is going to stay in business because the funds collected from all the senders of mail go into a common pool from which the administration of all post offices -- those of recipients and senders alike -- is funded. Much like the old telco function called 'separations and settlements' which was administered in the olden days by AT&T on behalf of itself and about 1400 independent telcos, it was thought to be a good idea for everyone to share in the revenue coming in, regardless of which telco (or post office) actually collected the money from the 'sender'. For telcos, it was part of the goal of 'universal service', or the theory that having everyone in possession of phone service made the phone service more valuable for everyone else. Ditto the post office; everyone pays 33 cents regardless of what it actually costs to get the letter to the other end. But the internet has always functioned differently, using a 'bill and keep' system rather than telco and post office's 'bill and share' system. We simply hope that what your ISP 'bills and keeps' is enough to keep him in business and is roughly equal to what my ISP 'bills and keeps'. If that is not the case, and your ISP must resort either through greed and avarice or of pure economic necessity to billing you for every byte and bit of traffic coming and going to your account and every second you stay on line, then the rest of us say that is just too bad, and let it go at that. For a long time, that was a perfectly adequate and acceptable way of doing things. Maybe it still is. The government long ago decided that telco and post office were 'universal enough' functions that to the users of each, the internal accounting functions etc, should be transparent, with all users getting more or less the same service at the same price, regardless of where it started and where it ended. If email is to truly become 'universal' to the same degree, shouldn't the same kind of accounting practices apply to it? No, I don't think the spammers should be stopped through anything other than peer pressure or a change in email accounting practices which makes mass mailing in a non-judicious way an extremely expensive proposal for them. I favor making the spammers accountable for what they do, not killing their speech rights totally, as atrocious as they are. Speaking of post offices, maybe this would be better as one of my periodic last laughs, but what the heck; here it is anyway. This is a true story. A casual aquaintence of mine several years ago was in the business of what we shall call 'adult mail order'. This was long before the net, email, web pages, etc. His thing was to send out pictures of naked ladies, very steamy letters, and solict twenty dollar bills by return mail ("cash is best, checks take longer to clear, etc"). And those twenty dollar bills did arrive in the mail, lots of them daily. He worked out of Chicago and a post office which was not only *huge* but where no one at the post office cared one way or the other. He decided to move to a very small town, with a post office so tiny it was called a 'fourth class office' and operated out of the post mistress' home, a room on the side of her house actually. An old biddy who tended to look down her nose and askance at any- thing not meeting her own puritanical standards, it took her all of a couple days of handing him his incoming mail each day to figure out what he was doing -- all perfectly legal, meeting every single law for 'adult mail' -- and she developed an 'attitude'; she would see him at the counter, purse her lips, almost hold her nose and hand him his packet of mail. For all I know, she may have read some of it before giving it to him , but he knew that she knew what it was about. Obviously, he bought a lot of postage. So one day when he came in, he said to her, "I told to change my business reply envelope trust fund so it would be handled through you, and also my postage meter so I could get it filled here from now on, and here is a check for five thousand dollars payable to 'postmaster' to fill my meter and replenish my trust fund." He said her eyes got big, like saucers, a smile came over her face as she examined all the paperwork he gave her. She told him, if he planned on doing that volume of business on a regular basis, "I will get changed from a fourth-class office to a regular postal facilty instead, and I will get a bigger allotment and budget for the operating expenses here. I think you and I are going to get to be very good friends real soon." And from that day forward when he brought in a couple hundred pieces of mail every day of 'those naked pictures he sends out' as the post mistress phrased it, the lady always had a cheery greeting and smile for him. He told me he never did quiz her or push her on how she knew they were 'naked pictures' or how she knew all the mail that he recieved each day had twenty dollar bills carefully hidden between two sheets of paper. As he explained it to me, 'in Chicago using a post office with more than ten thousand box holders, a couple dozen large corporations using that post office which was open 24 hours per day in its sorting operations, etc, the young punks, dopeheads and bozos they had working there never had any trouble figuring out which box holders were getting 'cash in the mail' on a regular basis; I assume an old biddy who had run the post office for thirty years in a town of six hundred people had the same sort of 'insight' into her customer's service requirements.' As 'they' say, money talks; everything else walks. Too bad the folks who developed Usenet, email, and the net in general wanted everything to be so open and 'free' and all that. It may be the death of us yet. PAT] ------------------------------ From: aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz) Subject: Re: Junk E-Mail Filters Spawn a Suit Against Microsoft Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 11:10:46 -0500 As much as I would like to think that Blue Mountain's email deserves to be bounced or deleted, it appears that Microsoft was wrong. It's surprising that so few learned from Prodigy's rude lesson on censorship. Prodigy learned, when they did a poor job of censoring public forums, was that once you assume the role of a censor, you're now responsible for content, both good and bad. Although it could be argued that Microsoft didn't have enough names in the junk mail filter, they do they appear to have had their hands dirty in this deal, since they damn well knew about Blue Mountain after trying to buy the company. Microsoft should be made to pay for their stupidity, be embarrased globally (again), and rerelease the product with NO names in the junk mail filter. That's certainly not going to stop us from continuing to bounce Blue Mountain junk mail, but stupidity should have it's own unique reward. ------------------------------ From: midshires@cix.co.uk (Andrew Emmerson) Subject: Re: WE/AT&T Paint & Process Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 18:46 +0000 (GMT Standard Time) Organization: CIX - Compulink Information eXchange Reply-To: midshires@cix.co.uk > I'm new to restoring telephones and am curious about how the folks at > Western Electric/AT&T used to recondition the finish on the bakelite > phones. If they did it like British Telecom did, the answer is in two ways ... (1) Bulk refurbishing (in the Post Office Factory at Cwmcarn, South Wales) was done with a rapidly rotating brush on a bench. The operator shoved a piece of 'soap' (actually a kind of pumice stone, possibly what is called soapstone) into the brush, then held the piece of plastic against the revolving brush (which now contained a fine powder off the 'soap'). Only light pressure was required and a skilled operator could achieve a superb lustre on the plastic. I witnessed this myself and had to admire the skill of these girls. (2) One-off refurbishment was done using 'Paste, Polishing No. 5' and a hard cloth. This paste came in a tube looking like a toothpaste tube and was an oily, yellow paste containing a mild abrasive and some waxy substance that gave a superb lustre when buffed up afterwards. You rubbed the bakelite with the paste and cloth; the polish would go dark as it absorbed dirt. Take it off with the hard cloth, then buff up with a soft cloth or duster. This gives superb results, far better than using a liquid polish (such as Brasso) or automotive chrome cleaning paste (Solvol Autosol and the like). Fortunately Paste, Polishing No. 5 is still made by the original manufacturer and is sold by the publisher of a vintage wireless magazine as 'Baykobrite' (vintage wireless enthusiasts use it for cleaning bakelite radio cases). You can also buy it in bulk (minimum order one carton of 12 tubes) from the manufacturer. A tube sells retail for around UKP2.00 (=US$3.20). E-mail me for contact address details. Andrew Emmerson, Telecomms Heritage Group. ------------------------------ From: ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu (Bill Ranck) Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: 1 Mar 1999 18:32:51 GMT Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Donald Seeley wrote: >> Intel has said users will be able to download a software control utility >> from its Web site allowing them enable and disable the serial number at > Are they planning to capture the s/n of the machines that do? Uh, maybe I'm just dense, but so what? If I ordered a PIII from some mailorder house and installed it in a machine, what useful information would Intel get from knowing that someone using CPU id number xxxxxx has downloaded the turn-on/turn-off utility? Intel almost certainly doesn't know who the end purchaser was. I suppose they might be able to request the info from the vendor they sold it to, but it may have gone through 2 or 3 layers of re-sellers before the end user gets it. Why all the paranoia? Bill Ranck +1-540-231-3951 ranck@vt.edu Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Computing Center ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 19:10:36 +0000 From: Anthony Naggs Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Organization: Ubikuity After much consideration Monty Solomon decided to share these wise words: > In the latest turn of events, a programmer at a German computer > publication, Computer Technology or c't, claimed Tuesday to have > devised a method of activating and reading the serial number without > the computer user's knowledge or consent. > "Contrary to Intel's description so far, the system architecture > allows for individual identification by software tricks," according to > a statement posted on the publication's Web site. C'T seem to be speculating wildly. They seem to be claiming that the low power shutdown mode of CPUs used in laptops would put the serial number into the default enabled state. The main problem with this appears to be that the announced models of Pentium III don't even have such a mode! Regards, Anthony ------------------------------ From: Eric Bohlman Subject: Re: Mobile Phone Outage Tied to Changeover Organization: ICGNetcom Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 01:09:34 GMT Stan Schwartz wrote: > (The Charlotte Observer, 02/25/99) > Service restored, but some customers' bills may rise > Jensen said Cellular One/Bravo would honor Bell Atlantic Mobile > contracts, though not necessarily the prices they contain. She said This is the most flagrant example of doublespeak I've seen in a long time. If a price is one of the terms of a contract, then "honoring the contract" means "honoring the price." The phrase "honoring a contract" is simply a linguistic shortcut for "honoring the *terms* of a contract." It is not in any way meaningful to speak of honoring a contract but not its terms. It is an oxymoron. What Jensen is really saying is "we expect our customers to honor the terms of the contract we both signed, but we won't hold ourselves to the same standard." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Which is why I suggested the customers as a class contact an attorney. Someone here is going to have to deal with this and make things right. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #25 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 2 15:13:17 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA21848; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 15:13:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 15:13:17 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903022013.PAA21848@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #26 TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Mar 99 15:13:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 26 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Some Bumps Along The Road To Local Competition (Joey Lindstrom) FCC Ruling on Access Changes to ISPs (Jay R. Ashworth) Telecom Portal Opens (Ryan Lanctot) Mobile Phone Price Wars Heat up in Hong Kong (Tad Cook) Exploiting - and Protecting - Personal Information (Monty Solomon) Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel (Derek Balling) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Billy Harvey) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Donald Seeley) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 16:31:20 -0700 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Some Bumps Along The Road To Local Competition A few weeks ago, I wrote a short note here telling folks about the new Sprint Canada local competition starting up here in Calgary - this being the FIRST Canadian city to have local competition (and LNP). I placed my order, and everything was supposed to have been online last Tuesday. Well, there were a few bumps along the road that I'd like to share with you. :-) First, Sprint made an error. I guess they figured everyone who signed up would also opt for LNP and wish to keep their existing phone number. I, on the other hand, had requested a change of number (to one from their pool of numbers) and that, I think, blew their minds. :-) Hey, after all, they're brand new at this. So a Sprint Canada technician showed up at my door to "install" the new service. I explained the situation to him and we got it all straightened out - but he had a peek at the demarc in the house and said that it had to be upgraded. Specifically, Telus' existing wiring had to be connected to a working demarc, which would then connect to a standard phone jack into another line block which would serve all my house lines. And, best of all, TELUS had to install this because they were actually responsible for the line after it left my house -- Sprint needs to cover their asses legally. OK, fine. When will Telus come and do the work? Oh, either later today or early tomorrow, I was told. Oh, and by the way, your phone line will be completely disconnected until this happens. The Telus tech showed up Friday morning. The entire ten minutes he was here, he was bitching about the incompetence of the Sprint Canada people and saying, indirectly, that *I* was an idiot for ever having switched my service to someone else. He left, and I phoned Sprint to confirm the work had been done (on my now-working-again) line. Later that day they called me back to confirm that my line was now physically connected to Sprint's equipment, but due to the earlier confusion about switching-versus-new-installation, the new phone number wouldn't be activated until Monday. Fine by me, I hadn't notified too many people about the new number anyways. Today is Monday. I woke up about 3 in the afternoon (I work a night shift) to find some messages on my machine from Sprint, asking me to phone them. When I contacted them, they asked me if I had told Telus that I had changed my mind and wanted to stay with Telus. Say what? It turns out that they had two separate reports that I'd done just that. One from the installer, and one from someone in their network operations centre who claims to have spoken directly to me and confirmed that I wanted to remain with Telus. This raised some alarm bells at Sprint, because I had spoken with them *AFTER* the Telus technician had left my premises to find out when the new number would be online. I replied that this was, as they suspected, a complete crock. In the ensuing conversation, I found out the following: 1) I wasn't the only person that this had happened to (Telus trying to win me back by fraud), and 2) Telus has been as uncooperative as possible in every respect in their dealings with Sprint Canada vis-a-vis customers switching their local service to Sprint. (Sprint is renting the lines from Telus, but has their own switches.) I'm told that they (Sprint) are fast-tracking this and should have things all set up properly in the next 24 hours. I told Sprint that if they needed a written complaint from me regarding Telus' actions, to just let me know what address to send it to. She said someone in their legal department may get in touch with me about that. Sprint's been quite good about all this. You do expect some problems when you're dealing with a company that's BRAND NEW to their market, and they did indeed make one mistake - but it was then compounded by intentional incompetence and outright lies by Telus. As soon as Sprint realized their initial mistake (on Wednesday of last week), they told me I'd receive a $20 credit on my first phone bill, which was good enough for me. Telus has never offered me a credit on my Telus bill when they've screwed up ... Anyone else out there have any similar horror stories? I do wonder how this compares to experiences in the US ... From Joey Lindstrom Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU, joey@lindstrom.com Visit The NuServer! http://www.GaryNumanFan.NU Visit The Webb! http://webb.GaryNumanFan.NU DOS never says "EXCELLENT command or filename"... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 13:38:34 -0500 From: Jay R. Ashworth Subject: FCC Ruling on Access chages to ISPs Monty quotes the NY Times: > WASHINGTON -- A computer user's dial-up calls to the Internet are > interstate communications subject to federal jurisidiction, federal > regulators concluded on Thursday. > Until now, Internet dial-ups have been treated as local calls. Alas, the Times has gotten it wrong, courtesy of the AP. Well, ok, they didn't quite "get it wrong", but the copy is misleading, for the purpose everyone wants to use it for. For the past decade or more now, there has been a perceived running threat that the FCC would decide that people who operate big incoming-only modem pools (you know: BBSs and ISPs) should be treated like long distance companies, and required to pay per-minute fees to Local Exchange Carriers. The opposite stance, of course, has been: "we're customers, and we follow the letter of the regulations; why should we be classified any differently than any other big company with lots of phone lines?" The issue, of course, is that if ISPs start being charged by the minute for their incoming calls, flat rate Internet access is dead. Every time this has come up, there's been a hue and cry, out of all proportion to the actual facts of the situation -- but _in_ proportion to the fact that the people in question _thought_ that it was already a done deal -- and the FCC has continued to avoid making a ruling that would allow LECs to charge ISPs by the minute. I call your attention, in particular, to: http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/News_Releases/1999/nrcc9014.html where the FCC says, in pertinent part: "the decision preserves the rule that exempts the Internet and other information services from interstate access charges. This means that those consumers who continue to access the Internet by dialing a seven-digit number will not incur long distance charges when they do so." So, whether the FCC correctly perceives that, from a telephony standard, Internet access phone calls are inTERstate (with all due homage to Mark Cuccia :-) -- they do seem to think so, and they're flat wrong (my call starts at 727-343 and ends at 727-573; how is _that_ an interstate _telephone call_??) -- they aren't applying that opinion to anything that would cause ISPs to have to pay access charges at this time, and they're soliciting comments. The comment I'd recommend is: "the universe in question is _voice telephone calls_, cause that's what the regs talk about. The fact that there's a modem on the voice line is immaterial to the way the regs are written, and pursuant to the regs, the call is inTRAstate. End of story." Obviously, I'd suggest paraphrasing. :-) [ As I have done several times in the past, I'll note that anyone who likes is encouraged to distribute this message in any forum they like -- SUBJECT to the condition that they not change it in any way, and make sure it includes the Date posted header. --j ] Cheers, jra ------------------------------ From: rlanctot@direct.ca (Ryan Lanctot) Subject: Telecom Portal Opens Organization: Lanctot Consulting Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 18:46:42 GMT New Telecom Portal Announced The Telecom Career Center, located at http://www.telecomcareercenter.com/, is proud to announce the introduction of its telecommunications portal and career resource site. TCC is a community committed to helping individuals gain employment, knowledge, professional development and advancement in today's telecommunications industry. Pat Montani, President of TCC said, "The Telecom Career Center is unique. There's nothing on the web that encompasses the resources and networking ability that we provide. TCC is becoming THE centralized spot for telecommunications resources on the Internet." The Telecom Career Center is a multifaceted site, encompassing the fields Telecom Career Resources, Education & Training, Finance & Investment, Mentoring and Products & Services, to name a few. Each category in the portal has an associated discussion group so that those in the telecommunications industry can gather together in common areas. Daily, targeted telecommunications news feeds are under development. The Telecom Career Center is head-officed in British Columbia, Canada. To contact TCC please call Pat Montani at 604-932-0939 or e-mail tccsales@telecomcareercenter.com ------------------------------ Subject: Mobile Phone Price Wars Heat up in Hong Kong Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 22:19:59 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) HONG KONG (AP) -- Hong Kong's six mobile phone providers are in a mad scramble to buy customer loyalty -- offering up noodles, cash and free phone calls -- following a change that allows users to change companies more easily. The territory's ubiquitous mobile phone users gained the ability Monday to switch service providers while keeping the same number, pushing the phone companies into a battle for market share. Analysts predicted a lot of switching will take place in the next few weeks, though they had their doubts about whether the new competition in an already cutthroat industry will be intense enough to run any of the market's six players out of business. "The market is big enough for six players," said Derek Chan, telecommunications analyst at Bear Stearns Asia Ltd. Nearly 3 million Hong Kong residents -- 40 percent of the population of one of the world's most congested cities -- have mobile telephones. Across the territory, there is little respite from the ringing. In some movie theaters, it's almost impossible to sit through the film without being interrupted. The phones go off in shops and restaurants, although some elite establishments have imposed bans. It's all music to the ears of the telephone executives. One of the industry's top players, Hongkong Telecom, is giving away noodles and yogurt drinks to promote its service. Doling out cold cash is the tactic at rival SmarTone. Others are sticking to the more traditional route of slashing prices and giving extended discounts. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Exploiting - and Protecting - Personal Information Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 19:24:22 -0500 http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/03/biztech/articles/01digi.html DIGITAL COMMERCE By DENISE CARUSO For the last few weeks, the data privacy battle has been waged with such fury that privacy advocates have not known whether to cry, cheer or simply assume the fetal position. Personal privacy -- the disposition of all those pieces of information that computers hold about each of us -- has been debated in the electronic world for almost two decades. Although the issues are complex, the bottom lines have always been pretty clearly drawn. People and companies that sell personal data want to be able to collect and distribute it pretty much with abandon, and they fight like cornered weasels at even the suggestion of government regulation. Yet, most people online -- 87 percent in a 1997 Georgia Tech survey -- want "complete control" over their personal data. And if they feel violated by data collectors, they often scream bloody murder. In 1991, for example, Lotus Corp. was forced to cancel shipments of Marketplace, a CD-ROM data base, after receiving thousands of angry e-pistles from people who took grievous offense at the data base's content: the names, addresses, income levels, numbers of children and other data for every household in the United States. More recently, privacy advocates wrested a partial victory from Intel Corp., after the company announced that its new Pentium III chips contained embedded electronic serial numbers for authenticating documents, e-mail and copyrighted material. Watchdogs warned that the numbers could be used to identify a computer to prying software, or to allow companies or agencies to track a person's movements across the Internet. Intel refused to remove the number, but agreed to provide software that allows computer makers to hide it behind a digital fig leaf. And the California Legislature, often a bellwether for technology issues, is considering more than a dozen privacy laws, including one that would restrict the collection and disclosure of personal information by government, business or nonprofit organizations. It specifically includes information gathered via Internet sites. Still, plenty of others are rushing to cash in on the data gold rush. Privacy advocates were extremely cranky after discovering that Florida, South Carolina and Colorado were selling residents' driver's license information to a New Hampshire-based company, Image Data LLC. They were even more outraged to discover that the Secret Service had financed another private company's efforts to develop a national data base of driver's license photographs. And in the most telling testament yet to the commercial value of personal data in the Internet economy, a start-up called Free PC announced that it would provide a free Internet connection and a free Compaq computer to anyone willing to "apply" by answering a detailed questionnaire and then accepting constant bombardment by advertisers based on the personal profile created from the questionnaire. Rich Le Furgy, chairman of the Internet Advertising Bureau, an industry group, said that advertisers haven't even begun to tap the Internet's potential. They are now investigating how to aim promotions at individual consumers based on their online behavior: Vendors want to co-market products in much the same way that convenience stores did after discovering, for example, that people who buy beer often buy diapers at the same time. That is not exactly music to the ears of a privacy-sensitive consumer. Obviously, online advertising organizations find themselves straddling a very pointy fence between companies that pay for advertising and customers who are subjected to that advertising. The constituencies have very different viewpoints, and finding a solution palatable to both is not a task for the squeamish. For example, Le Furgy said, "it would be a beautiful thing" for consumers to control their personal data -- especially if it meant avoiding legislation and regulation. "Privacy is an enabler of commerce," he said. If consumers can get money for their personal information and still control it, "they'll be much more willing to provide it." In fact, a new breed of Internet company is already making a business of that concept. These companies, known as infomediaries -- a term coined by John Hagel, co-author of "Net Worth: Shaping Markets When Customers Make the Rules" (Harvard Business School Press, 1999) -- will step in and help consumers regain control of their personal data. For a price, of course. A recent Wired News feature predicts that a coming pack of these entrepreneurs will "cut the consumer in" on the deal when information about them is bought and sold. Infomediaries keep a percentage for themselves for providing the security mechanisms by which consumers can control exactly who buys their personal data and for what purpose. But some privacy advocates would eliminate even the infomediary and pass laws granting consumers not just civil rights to their privacy, but property rights to their private data, ending the free-market eminent domain that data marketers have exploited for decades. Citing a Virginia law that forbids the use of anyone's name or likeness without permission, Ram Avrahami unsuccessfully sued U.S. News & World Report in 1996 for selling his name to another magazine. At the time, Avrahami's opponents ridiculed him for suing over 8 cents, which is what the magazine had paid for his name. "The point is this: It's 8 cents for me, for you, for 100 million other Americans, which becomes big money," said Avrahami, who has since become a leading advocate of private data ownership. "Think of it this way: Free PC proves that our personal information is worth hundreds of dollars. Now, who should get those dollars, if not us?" Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 19:18:57 PST From: Derek Balling Subject: Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel On Mon, 1 Mar 1999 ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu (Bill Ranck) wrote: > Uh, maybe I'm just dense, but so what? If I ordered a PIII from some > mailorder house and installed it in a machine, what useful information > would Intel get from knowing that someone using CPU id number xxxxxx > has downloaded the turn-on/turn-off utility? > Intel almost certainly doesn't know who the end purchaser was. I > suppose they might be able to request the info from the vendor they > sold it to, but it may have gone through 2 or 3 layers of re-sellers > before the end user gets it. > Why all the paranoia? A valid question, so here's the answer. You buy something online. They require you to have a PSN enabled. Your PSN is now mapped to your name, address, phone #, SSN possibly, mastercard/visa number, etc. as well as that item you just purchased. You go visit a web site somewhere else. The great land of marketing has SHARED that knowledge about you, your buying habits, your demographic info, etc. That site sees your PSN, maps it to what IT knows about you (maybe you buy stuff from them?) and the knowledge base grows. Picture all the horror stories you heard about cookies. This is LIKE a cookie, except that THIS time, they're valid concerns. EVERY site can see your PSN. EVERY site can collate data about you and share it with whomever they want to. Pretty soon a pretty good profile has been built up about you, what you like, the web sites you visit, the works. It is indeed a VERY VERY scary thing. Luckily, many of the hardware vendors are disabling them in the BIOS (which, while not an optimum solution of Intel removing the feature entirely, is a good start). Even better is that, most likely, you'll notice that, especially on open-source OS's like Linux, you'll see hacks to either randomize or falsify your PSN available in short order. Always remember -- applications talk to the hardware via the kernel. If the kernel tells you the PSN is 696969696969-0042, then you're going to dutifuly report it as such. :) Its just another reason to with PPC or Alpha hardware these days ... ====================================================================== Derek J. Balling | "Bill Gates is a monocle and a white dredd@megacity.org | fluffy cat from being a villain in the http://www.megacity.org/ | next Bond film." - Dennis Miller ====================================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 00:12:19 EST Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel From: Billy Harvey Thomas A. Horsley writes: > You know, it seems to me ethernet boards have had unique IDs for years > and years and years, but no privacy groups ever hollered about that. > I think the mistake Intel made was the spin they put on the initial > descriptions of the silly ID number -- as a way to track e-commerce > activity (a thing most individual consumers don't care about other > than the negative big-brother aspects). > With ethernet boards, the ID really is a convenience for things like > reverse-arp lookups, making it simpler to boot and administer your > machine, etc. > Intel shouda spun in a different direction :-). The difference is that ethernet chips have a unique id number due to necessity in order to work per specification. There is no similar requirement in a processor chip. If some type of multiprocessor communication protocol was developed that could put such a unique number to good use, and which performed significantly better than any protocol not having such a number, then there would be some technical justification for the id number. Without such technical justification, only the political is left, and the technique is nowhere near robust enough to prevent abuse in an open environment. Besides, ethernet id numbers can be changed under software control in many devices, and can also be faked. They were never designed, nor purported to be, as useful for fingerprinting of source. Regards, Billy ------------------------------ From: Donald Seeley Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: 1 Mar 1999 21:33:52 GMT Organization: EnterAct, L.L.C. Bill Ranck wrote: > Donald Seeley wrote: >>> Intel has said users will be able to download a software control utility >>> from its Web site allowing them enable and disable the serial number at >> Are they planning to capture the s/n of the machines that do? > Uh, maybe I'm just dense, but so what? If I ordered a PIII from some --- snip - snip --- > Why all the paranoia? What Intel *really* needs is to add an instruction that preserves the ironic tone in my words after I've finished typing them. Not paranoid, just not as funny as I was trying to be. Apologies. Don Seeley Daring Designs Typography - Graphics - Layout http://www.daringdesigns.com/~dschi/ dschi@daringdesigns.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #26 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 4 22:06:48 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA22465; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 22:06:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 22:06:48 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903050306.WAA22465@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #27 TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Mar 99 22:06:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 27 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Bell Fumbles Latest Long Distance Throw (Monty Solomon) DSL Has a Secret (Monty Solomon) Re: Need Help With Erlang Calculations (David Lucantoni) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Colin Sutton) Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel (Bill Ranck) Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel (Steve Cogorno) Re: Junk E-Mail Filters Spawn a Suit Against Microsoft (Andy Yee) Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime (John David Galt) Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime (John W. Leblanc) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 03:29:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Bell fumbles latest long distance throw http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,33181,00.html By John Borland Staff Writer, CNET News.com March 2, 1999, 2:45 p.m. PT A set of high-profile negotiations between Bell Atlantic, competing phone companies, and Pennsylvania regulators have collapsed without agreement after four months of talks. The closed-door discussions were intended to set rules for competition in the state's local telephone and high-speed Internet markets, setting the stage for Bell Atlantic's move into long distance. But the final expiration date on the talks passed last night without an agreement between the parties, throwing the issues back into the hands of regulators and judges. The failed talks will likely slow the pace of competition in the state's local phone market, and possibly delay Bell Atlantic's bid to offer long distance service. The renewed uncertainty could also threaten state approval of the merger between Bell Atlantic and GTE, since several prominent state politicians have tied their support of the deal to concessions by the Bell company. The negotiations started last October, when the state Public Utilities Commission agreed to combine a long list of outstanding issues into a single set of talks, dubbed the Global Settlement process. Included in the discussions were Bell Atlantic's requests for long distance approval, a long list of controversial connection agreements between it and competitors, and rules governing the company's control of network elements such as high-speed digital subscriber line (DSL) Internet service. The parties to the talks, which included Bell Atlantic, competing local and long distance phone companies, consumer groups, legislators, and regulators, agreed not to discuss the talks until they had concluded. But signs that the talks were foundering were present at least since January, when several prominent state senators withdrew from the negotiations, citing Bell Atlantic's intractability. "This was an attempt at a negotiated settlement," said Christopher Craig, counsel to state Senator Vincent Fumo. "Not much was given up or compromised on the part of Bell Atlantic." Too little, too late? Yesterday, the commission released a final set of compromise proposals to the parties involved in the talks. But at midnight, the talks officially closed, with the commission's last attempt at compromise appears left with little hope of adoption. Regulators are now no longer allowed to participate in the discussions, and MCI WorldCom said today they would not independently pursue compromise with the local phone company. "We tried for four months, we tried with the commissioners mediating," said Elena French, an MCI WorldCom spokeswoman. "We don't think it will be fruitful to continue without the commissioners there." For its part, Bell Atlantic says the talks were helpful, and it will continue trying to negotiate with competitors. "We believe that significant progress was made," the company said in a statement today. "Bell Atlantic continues to work with the parties and expects to reach agreement with many of them on the critical issues as quickly as possible." Copyright 1995-99 CNET, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy policy. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 03:46:56 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DSL Has a Secret http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9903/02/dslsecret.idg/ by Tim Greene (IDG) -- Digital subscriber line (DSL) service that starts out at 1.5M bit/sec at your site isn't typically run at that bandwidth all the way through the DSL carrier's network. Rather, your line contends with other customers' DSL links for a shared pipe into the carrier network. It is possible to buy a full bandwidth link all the way through the DSL carrier net, but be prepared to pay a premium and to negotiate service-level agreements (SLA) to ensure performance. In the growing battle to sell inexpensive high-speed access pipes, DSL partisans claim their technology is better than cable modems because it offers dedicated bandwidth, while cable is a shared medium. That is true, at least until the DSL line hits the first device in the service provider network, known as a DSL Access Multiplexer. There, DSL access lines are typically aggregated onto an oversubscribed backhaul trunk into the carrier's switched/routed network. That trunk represents a potential bottleneck that could make the service crawl. "All networks are oversubscribed," explains Bill Southworth, chairman and CEO of Harvard.Net, an ISP in Boston that specializes in DSL access. "And it works as long as there is enough capacity so aggregated traffic doesn't get throttled." When bandwidth through the service provider network is truly guaranteed, customers have to pay. For example, UUNET's UULink DSL Internet access costs $500, $600 and $900 per month for 128K, 364K and 768K bit/sec of guaranteed bandwidth, respectively. Low-cost DSL services, such as the rock-bottom $39 per month SBC Communications charges for a service supporting 1.5M bit/ sec downloads, don't come with such guarantees. What's a good number? DSL provider NorthPoint Communications oversubscribes its trunks by a measure of 2 to 1, meaning the bandwidth coming into a network trunk is twice what the trunk can bear. That method works without degrading customer service because in practice, all customers aren't using their lines at the same time. "That ratio is very conservative. We are not even close to dropping a packet," says John Stormer, NorthPoint's vice president of marketing. GTE, which has done some of the most thorough real-world DSL testing, says that 10-to-1 oversubscription still provides full throughput to customers 95% of the time, even if they are all surfing the Internet simultaneously. That's because even during heavy Web surfing, the link is idle much of the time, according to Dale Veeneman, senior principal member of technical staff at GTE Labs. With a group of casual Internet users as customers, the backhaul could be oversubscribed by 100 to 1 because not all the customers will be on at once, Veeneman says. The ISP link But there are other potential oversubscription bottlenecks, Veeneman warns. Often an ISP offers DSL access but has another carrier set up the DSL links. Customer traffic is concentrated onto an oversubscribed link into the DSL provider's network, and then aggregated again onto an oversubscribed link to the ISP. Customers need to be aware of aggregation practices into and out of the DSL carrier network, Veeneman says. Harvard.Net's Southworth says he is always buying more bandwidth for Internet links to limit oversubscription and prevent service degradation. Because there are multiple possible choke points, customers need to be clear about what part of the network the guarantees cover when they negotiate SLAs, says Beth Gage, an analyst with TeleChoice, a telecommunications consulting firm in Boston. "Some SLAs don't start until the switching office, and some only cover the last-mile link," she says. "You need to go step by step through what is covered, from physical and logical links to outside events like acts of God." Gage also notes that because DSL networks are still being built, links that are engineered to be oversubscribed may not be oversubscribed yet. What may work fine today might degrade tomorrow if service providers don't adjust as they add more. Customers can check end-to-end DSL performance by pinging the mail server at the ISP being accessed. The ping will measure round-trip time and see if packets are dropped, says Mike Lutz, a former network manager who researches DSL for Avalon Networks, an ISP in Iowa City, Iowa. If the customer can find an FTP server directly linked to the same ISP, downloading a file can indicate just how much bandwidth the DSL service provider is delivering, Lutz says. Tim Greene is a senior editor for Network World. Network World Senior Editor Denise Pappalardo contributed to this story. ------------------------------ From: David Lucantoni Subject: Re: Need Help With Erlang Calculations Date: 2 Mar 1999 13:40:00 GMT Organization: DLT Consulting, L.L.C. In article , digitalox@aol.com (DigitalOx) wrote: > I'm trying to write a progam that calulates the number of trunks need > for a desired grade of service and Erlangs using Erlang B. All the > equations I've found don't seem to solve for the # of trunks, and I > can' t get it (number of trunks) into the left hand side of the > equation because my math isn't so great. Anybody know how? The Erlang > B equation I have is > n 2 n > Eb = (A / n !) / ( 1 + A + A / 2! + A / n! ) > where Eb is the grade of service, A is the mean of offered traffic, > and n is the number trunks. For the most efficient and elegant algorithms for many traffic calculations (e.g., Erlang B blocking, number of trunks required, equivalent random method and Hayward's approximation, partial derivatives of the Erlang loss function, etc.) see the following paper by the incomparable Dave Jagerman (formerly of Bell Laboratories): D. L. Jagerman, "Methods in Traffic Calculations", AT&T Bell Laboratories Technical Journal, Vol. 63, No. 7, pp. 1283-1310, September, 1984. And for those of you who like to take the easy way out, he even supplies all the associated Fortran source code. David Lucantoni, Ph.D. | 10 Oak Tree Lane, Ocean, New Jersey 07712 DLT Consulting, LLC | Voice: +1.732.493.0587 Fax: +1.732.493.4465 David.Lucantoni@att.net | Network Architecture, Design & Analysis Performance Analysis Broadband Wireless Satellite Networks ------------------------------ From: Colin Sutton Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Organization: Syrinx Speech Systems Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 13:35:55 GMT Bill Ranck wrote in article ... > Why all the paranoia? Why indeed. VAXen and Sun workstations have had serial numbers for years! It's not paranoia, it's loss of the ability to copy software without paying for it. Colin Sutton ------------------------------ From: ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu (Bill Ranck) Subject: Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: 3 Mar 1999 21:18:06 GMT Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Derek Balling wrote: > On Mon, 1 Mar 1999 ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu (Bill Ranck) wrote: >> Uh, maybe I'm just dense, but so what? If I ordered a PIII from some >> Why all the paranoia? > A valid question, so here's the answer. > You buy something online. They require you to have a PSN enabled. Your PSN An unlikely scenario. There are too many non-Intel machines in the world to cut off that many potential customers. Any company that tries to "require" PSN will not succeed. How many old PII and older systems are still in use? How many non-Intel systems? > is now mapped to your name, address, phone #, SSN possibly, > mastercard/visa number, etc. as well as that item you just purchased. > You go visit a web site somewhere else. The great land of marketing has > SHARED that knowledge about you, your buying habits, your demographic > info, etc. That site sees your PSN, maps it to what IT knows about you > (maybe you buy stuff from them?) and the knowledge base grows. If they've got my name, address and other info, they can and do already share that info with others. Identifying me with some random PSN doesn't make that any worse (or better). The PSN thing isn't really realiable anyway. I might upgrade my processor. I use several different computers depending on where I am and what I'm doing. They can already get all the basic info on me about income level and such from the credit bureaus. The PSN doesn't make this any easier. It's already plenty easy. As for purchasing histories, most companies don't like to share that sort of data. I'm not saying that they wouldn't use it themselves internally, but most don't want competitors to know too much about their business and opening up all their customer data for sale would have the same effect as giving their competitors access to their internal sales data. > Luckily, many of the hardware vendors are disabling them in the BIOS > (which, while not an optimum solution of Intel removing the feature > entirely, is a good start). Even better is that, most likely, you'll > notice that, especially on open-source OS's like Linux, you'll see hacks > to either randomize or falsify your PSN available in short order. Personally, I like the idea of a CPU s/n. It's been used for software licensing for years in large systems. The privacy concerns are completely overblown, in my opinion. In fact, for the reasons stated above, I doubt it will ever have much effect on "e-commerce" except to facilitate session key generation. Bill Ranck +1-540-231-3951 ranck@vt.edu Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Computing Center [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let's use the analogy of caller-id on the telephone. A person who had the new chip and turned it off to avoid it being read under such circumstances would be like the person who does *67 before his calls to avoid identification. A person calling from a central office not equipped to transmit caller-id causes the recipient to get a message saying 'not available' or 'outside area'. I would think that merchants on the internet who were so insistent on getting the serial number embedded in the chip would have the courtesy to accept the lack of same in older machines. I can see some of them very possibly refusing to accept an order when they otherwise had a substantial amount of fraud and evidence showed that the chip serial number was present but deliberatly being with- held. I will tell you one example in which the serial number would prove most helpful: with things like AOL's Instant Messenger, their chat rooms, and other chat room programs all over the net. If the chat software would pick up that serial number and transmit it like caller-id to the person being asked to accept the chat request, it would allow the recipient to decide whether or not to accept the chat based on the user's previous experience with the person 'behind' that serial number in the past. I could decide for example to chat with a person whose serial number was shown, or 'unavailable', but not chat with someone who chose to withhold it from me. Knowledge of someone else's serial number would not do me any more or less good than knowing some person's phone number via my caller- id box; the caller would still have to choose to tell me that personal information if they wished to do so (unless there comes a day in the next few years when there is a 'criss-cross' directory of serial numbers on line, like a reverse lookup telephone directory today), but at least I could choose to block that serial number and its owner from contacting me or using my web site, etc. In the various discussions we've seen on the net about the invasion of privacy the serial number might cause, I do not think anyone has noted the GOOD things it can do as well in helping keep users aware of other users who practice fraud and deception in their postings. When caller-id was first becoming commonplace, there were these very same discussions about how businesses would develop these massive databases out of the phone numbers of people who called them, etc. It really did not happen. I do not think anyone can begrudge the pizza delivery services and taxicab dispatch services for using caller-id to help cut their rate of fraud and the criminal actions taken against their employees who work on the streets late at night. So if a child is using a chat as an example, or one of the more elaborate chats-with-visuals such as Net Meeting and an older person asks the child to do something which is inappropriate, would the ability of the child's parent to obtain the serial number be such a bad idea? The parent would have no idea whatsoever of the person's real name or address -- nor would it really matter what it was most of the time -- but at least the parent could ask the child to refrain from further contact with the individual. Caller-id has cut back tremendously on the malicious use of the phone as a way to hide. Before caller-id, large cities like Chicago had literally *hundreds* of malicious false alarms called in to the fire and police departments daily, just so the caller could watch the firemen and policemen rush off in good faith to save a life that did not exist or put out a fire which did not occur. Unlike caller-id which, when it was established in each community *immediatly* gave emergency authorities instant reference to the caller's name and address, this new chip we are hearing about won't tell us where a net-offender lives or his name, unless s/he has already chosen to make it available. No one here knows who went home today with a new computer they bought with the new chip in it. What we will be able to do is look at the caller to our website or chatroom or bulletin board system, etc and *regardless of the latest screen name or bogus email address the person uses* tell that person he is honored and welcome at our site, or that he is to stay away. Let's hope spammers all go out and buy new computers today! When they do, watch for mail filters to be developed which demand the serial number information in the process of sorting mail. Then instead of madly adding one site name after another to our filters, trying to find out what IP number space they use, etc, we simply take the one that that will never change regardless of how many ISPs give them the boot -- the little number on the chip. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Steve Cogorno Subject: Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 19:41:43 PST Derek Balling said: > You buy something online. They require you to have a PSN enabled. Your PSN > is now mapped to your name, address, phone #, SSN possibly, > mastercard/visa number, etc. as well as that item you just purchased. > You go visit a web site somewhere else. The great land of marketing has > SHARED that knowledge about you, your buying habits, your demographic > info, etc. That site sees your PSN, maps it to what IT knows about you > (maybe you buy stuff from them?) and the knowledge base grows. And why should I care? So a few online vendors get some more info about my buying habits. You think this isn't already cateloged with traditional mail-order companies? I can assure you it is, because of all the related but unsolicited catalogs that I receive after ordering from a company. Suppose there is no such thing as a PSN. The exact same process can be achieved through IP addresses. Here's what I think is the *real* reason people do not want PSNs to be available. This would allow software companies to license software to one and only one CPU. No more pirating software. That's what I think this is about - not some internet privacy hogwash. Steve cogorno@netcom.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I agree with you. A bad side effect may be some companies making the kinds of lists described, and a very good side effect will be the ability of users to *protect* their privacy by blocking the serial numbers of people who have offended them (see my earlier message in this issue.) But most assuredly companies developing software are going to see to it they get paid for every copy from now on. PAT] ------------------------------ From: AXYXeXeX@XjXaXsXcX.XcXoXmX (Andy Yee) Subject: Re: Junk E-Mail Filters Spawn a Suit Against Microsoft Organization: Jasc Software, Inc. Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 17:07:43 GMT ....and #1: Because they have deep pockets! In article , aboritz@CYBERNEX.NET (Alan Boritz) wrote: > Microsoft should be made to pay for their stupidity, be embarrased > globally (again), and rerelease the product with NO names in the junk > mail filter. That's certainly not going to stop us from continuing to > bounce Blue Mountain junk mail, but stupidity should have it's own > unique reward. Andy Yee Corporate E-Mail: See Above Software Engineer Coporate Web Page: http://www.jasc.com Jasc Software, Inc. Personal E-Mail: nde@yuck.net Personal Web Page: http://www.visi.com/~nde Question authority...and the authorities will question YOU! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 14:53:52 -0800 From: John David Galt Organization: Diogenes the Cynic Hot-Tubbing Society Subject: Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime Quoth Eric Bohlman: [cost problem explanation snipped] > Let's take a non-commercial example here: the mailings of a political > campaign. If I'm running a campaign for a candidate for alderman in > Chicago's 13th ward, I've got a strong incentive to make sure that > any campaign literature gets mailed only to addresses in the 13th > ward. Mail to addresses in the 10th ward, to addresses in Joliet, or > to addresses in Seattle costs the campaign money without making the > candidate more electable, so I go out of my way *not* to send > literature to such addresses. > But with e-mail, sending out a million promotional e-mails costs me > no more than sending out ten. Therefore, if I were to send out > unsolicited campaign e-mails, I would have *no economic incentive* > to go through my mailing list and exclude addresses for people > outside the 13th ward. Doing so would cost me time and money. It > would be easier and cheaper for me to shotgun-blast my campaign > message all over the world. The fact that 10,000 of the messages > land in Seattle doesn't matter to me. I would love to see this tried, because it would backfire spectacularly and the resulting news coverage might help the anti-spam cause. People selling (for example) the services of an immigration lawyer may not care that they annoy 100,000 people for every one whose business they bring in, but if a politician does it, a good chunk of those 100,000 will be able to vote for the other guy, and many of them will. What the problem boils down to is that "spam" is the result of a classic incentive trap: that is, a situation where someone can rake in all the benefits of his misbehavior, while spreading the costs over a large number of people. That type of situation makes government action necessary and justified. John David Galt ------------------------------ From: jwleblanc@my-dejanews.com (John LeBlanc) Subject: Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 16:18:07 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion In article , TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response: > Regards your third point, I do not see it as the spammers who are > particularly at fault here; it is the way in which the internet and > email was developed. The spammers exposed a vulnerability in the > net's way of doing things. In the case of the post office (or the > US Postal Service if you wish), in theory at least, the sender pays > the bill and the recipient pays nothing. The recipient's post office > does not have to worry about how *it* is going to stay in business > because the funds collected from all the senders of mail go into > a common pool from which the administration of all post offices -- > those of recipients and senders alike -- is funded. Much like the > old telco function called 'separations and settlements' which was > administered in the olden days by AT&T on behalf of itself and > about 1400 independent telcos, it was thought to be a good idea for > everyone to share in the revenue coming in, regardless of which > telco (or post office) actually collected the money from the > 'sender'. For telcos, it was part of the goal of 'universal service', > or the theory that having everyone in possession of phone service > made the phone service more valuable for everyone else. Ditto the > post office; everyone pays 33 cents regardless of what it actually > costs to get the letter to the other end. > But the internet has always functioned differently, using a 'bill and > keep' system rather than telco and post office's 'bill and share' > system. We simply hope that what your ISP 'bills and keeps' is enough > to keep him in business and is roughly equal to what my ISP 'bills and > keeps'. If that is not the case, and your ISP must resort either > through greed and avarice or of pure economic necessity to billing > you for every byte and bit of traffic coming and going to your account > and every second you stay on line, then the rest of us say that is > just too bad, and let it go at that. For a long time, that was a > perfectly adequate and acceptable way of doing things. Maybe it > still is. Pat, Using the argument that "this is the way the Internet was set up" won't hold water for me, since the Internet also was not set up to allow for the gross abuses heaped upon it by today's spammers. One spammer can open an account for which he pays $19.95 and send out a million pieces of email, and nearly every piece will consume at least some bandwidth if not only for the domains' mail servers to reject it and send it back. (Not to mention those pieces that are successfully delivered). Where's the rational reasoning behind allowing that to continue unimpeded and unregulated by some degree? On the other hand, if spammers are required to pay per piece sent, all of a sudden we have a commercial application of the system that makes sense. And cents. And cents and cents and cents. Which is not happening now, since it's the recipients who are being cent-enced and in-cents daily. > No, I don't think the spammers should be stopped through anything > other than peer pressure or a change in email accounting practices > which makes mass mailing in a non-judicious way an extremely expensive > proposal for them. I favor making the spammers accountable for what > they do, not killing their speech rights totally, as atrocious as > they are. Please point me to the place in the Constitution of the United States of America where it says that your right to free speech requires me to receive it, rather than choose to receive it. I'm not at all excited about regulations providing judicial pummeling for spamming, but the fact is that peer pressure has made not one dent in the problem. The long arm of the law weilds a two-edged sword, and I am well aware of the sometimes woeful consequences. Considering the demonstrated reluctance -- if not all-out arrogance -- against the obvious backlash against UCE, what else is there? At least we agree that spammers should pay. John LeBlanc jwleblanc (at) my-dejanews.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: > the internet was not set up for it .. The internet was not set up for a lot of things it is being used for today. No one twenty years ago had the vaguest idea where things would be today. I am sure Alex Bell did not have 900 numbers and telephone companies being used as collection agencies for hotchat conference bridges in mind either when he told Mr. Watson to come upstairs and clean up the battery acid which got spilled. The first twenty years of the internet were basically like the first hundred years or so of the telephone network. Now we change as needed or we get swallowed up and cast aside. > where in the US Constitution does it say ... It does not say it anywhere. But the problem is, the constitution says very little in the way of specifics about things. I am sure back in the late 1700's it did not occur to them that Alex Bell would spill some battery acid a century later and completely change the way in which people communicated or that radios would be invented or that two centuries later their First Amendment would be used as an argu- ment in the ongoing debate about email spam. So like Western Union and its infamous 1879 internal memo in which it was stated that the company 'could see no practical use or benefit in a talking telegraph system' and therefore would decline to purchase Bell's patents and develop a telephone network on its own, perhaps you can see no real reason for making changes in the internet. After all, 'it was not intended for ...' ... and 'nothing in the constitution requires me to ....' ... So maybe when the year 2050 rolls around there will be you and a dozen others left on the internet while everyone else has migrated to something called the Spamnet or the CommerceNet, and there will be these very cute, antique and quaint things known as the .edu domain sites. And John, we would not want to impose on you; we really wouldn't. But let's make some realistic changes in the way things are done here or watch it all come to a screaming halt one of these days. (Ooops, did I just predict the imminent death of the net once again? I do that every now and then you know. I've decided the net won't die on its own, it will be like one of my cats which lived to the grand old age (for a cat) of 23 years. When the cat began to sit helplessly in the corner each day waiting for me to pick it up, feed it, and clean up the messes it made because it had forgotten or was too feeble in its old age to go to its litter box, it became my obligation as its custodian or caretaker -- I *refuse* to say 'owner' -- to take it to the veternarian for my final responsibility to the animal. Then I just cried all the way back home, not really giving a damn who saw me. Maybe one of these days our new 'owners' -- whatever federal agencies oversee us with our domain names, etc -- will decide it is time to give this net its eternal rest also, in favor of a new and 'improved' networking system ... the Commerce and Spam Net. Then would Spamford Wallace get the Last Laugh or not? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #27 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 5 12:19:17 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA25181; Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:19:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:19:17 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903051719.MAA25181@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #28 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Mar 99 12:19:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 28 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Canada to Merge With Metronet Communications(Eric Blondin) German Hotel Phone Rates (Sheraton is Not the Only Offender) (John Covert) CPUC Staff Recommends OVERLAYS for 415, 510 (Linc Madison) Telephone Companies Vow to Keep Lines Open on Y2K Day (Tad Cook) UCLA Short Course: "Design Patterns, Frameworks, and CORBA" (Bill Goodin) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eric Blondin Subject: AT&T Canada to Merge With Metronet Commuications Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 09:33:41 -0500 Thought this might interest a few of you, kind of a new step in the local competition in Canada. From: portfolio@newswire.ca To: "Portfolio Email User" $7 Billion Transaction Creates Canadian National Super-Carrier with Local, National and International Reach AT&T Corp. to Own 31% of Merged Company, MetroNet Shareholders to Own 69%; AT&TCorp. Agrees to Purchase Remaining Shares of MetroNet TORONTO, March 4 /CNW/ - AT&T Canada Corp., one of Canada's leading telecommunications carriers, and MetroNet Communications Corp., Canada's largest facilities-based competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC), today announced that they have executed a definitive agreement to merge the companies in a transaction valued at approximately $7 billion. The merger of MetroNet and AT&T Canada will create Canada's premier telecommunications company, to be called AT&T Canada Corp. The merged company will be the first national, network-based company to meet all of the telecom needs of Canadian business customers with one-stop shopping for local and long distance voice, data, Internet and electronic commerce solutions, as well as wireless services through Cantel AT&T. Following the merger, AT&T Canada will have combined annualized revenues of approximately $1.4 billion, more than 4,000 employees, and over $3.5 billion in assets. The merger combines AT&T Canada's extensive customer base, nation-wide facilities-based long distance network, powerful brand and global reach with MetroNet's state-of-the-art telecommunications facilities, data networks and over $900 million of cash to execute its strategy. The terms of the agreement outline a multi-stage transaction, which will result in MetroNet shareholders indirectly owning 69 percent of the merged company and AT&T Corp. indirectly owning 31 percent. The merged company, which will include ACC TelEnterprises, will market its services under the AT&T Canada brand. ``The complementary strengths and assets of these companies make the ``fit'' of this merger perfect for customers,'' said Dan Somers, Chairman of AT&T Canada Corp. and Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of AT&T. ``MetroNet customers gain access to AT&T Canada's established long-distance voice and data network and the vast AT&T global network; AT&T Canada customers gain access to the country's most modern local service networks.'' ``This transaction is fantastic for our customers, our shareholders, and Canadian telecommunications overall,'' said Craig Young, President and Chief Executive Officer of MetroNet Communications. ``Our customers will immediately have access to not only an advanced, end-to-end national network for ``any distance'' and ``any bandwidth'' service, but to a global network and services, supported by the world's preeminent name in telecommunications.'' ``This merger will foster competition in Canada by combining the strengths of two innovators in competitive Canadian telecommunications and offering customers a wider array of choices based on the most comprehensive national telecom network in Canada,'' said Jim Meenan, President and CEO of AT&T Canada Corp. ``It is also a major step forward in realizing our vision of bringing Canadian customers unparalleled access to the power of a seamless North American wired and wireless network.'' In addition, AT&T Corp. has agreed to purchase, or arrange for another entity to purchase, all of the shares currently held by MetroNet shareholders for the greater of at least C$75 per share or the then appraised fair market value. The exact timing will likely be partially dependent upon the future status of federal foreign ownership regulations. Important terms of the MetroNet share purchase by AT&T Corp. are outlined below in the Summary of Significant Terms. Consideration for the MetroNet shares will be paid in the form of cash, AT&T shares, or a combination thereof, with the number of AT&T shares determined based upon the market price on or about the time the MetroNet shares are purchased. The boards of directors of the companies have approved the transaction, which MetroNet shareholders will be asked to approve at a shareholder meeting expected to be held in May, 1999. If approved by MetroNet shareholders, the merger of the companies is expected to be completed by the end of the second quarter of 1999. The combined sales forces of MetroNet Communications and AT&T Canada will provide a full suite of advanced business telecommunications solutions, offered completely over a state-of-the art network, from basic local dial tone to global data networking. The combined company will have not only Canada's preeminent nationwide ``any-distance'' network capabilities, but also unrivalled professional expertise through its sales and technical organizations in more than 150 locations across Canada. The network of the combined company will boast national, high-speed fibre-optic capabilities with unequalled bandwidth for local and long distance voice, data and Internet services. Backed by the unparalleled reliability of SONET rings and with more border crossings than any other telecommunications provider in Canada, the merged company will be able to deliver the finest global solutions of any telecom company in Canada. ``In addition to the compelling operating and capital expenditure synergies that the transaction creates, it recognizes tremendous value for MetroNet's shareholders and credit enhancement for MetroNet's bondholders,'' said Bob Bicksler, MetroNet's Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. ``Besides guaranteeing MetroNet's shareholders a floor on the value of their shares, the structure of the transaction also creates the opportunity for our shareholders to continue participating in the value creation opportunities presented by the newly deregulated Canadian telecommunications market.'' A new Board of Directors for MetroNet with 12 members will be assembled, on which AT&T Corp. will have 4 seats upon consummation of the transaction. Jim Meenan will serve as Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the new company, Craig Young will serve as Vice Chairman and President, and Bob Bicksler will serve as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Other senior management appointments will be announced as merger integration planning commences and the new board is assembled. Merger of AT&T Canada and MetroNet Communications Summary of Significant Terms Please note: This summary is qualified in its entirety by the definitive agreements executed by the parties that will be described more fully in materials to be sent to shareholders in conjunction with the approval of this transaction. Enterprise Value of Transaction: Approximately $7 billion. Contributions to Merged Company: AT&T's 33 percent voting interest in AT&T Canada Corp. and 100 percent interest in ACC TelEnterprises Ltd., along with the 67 percent interest in the former AT&T Canada Long Distance Services currently held in trust. All of the assets and operations of MetroNet Communications. AT&T Corp. Ownership upon Consummation of Transaction: 31 percent of the non-voting shares of the merged company and 23 percent of the Class A voting shares of MetroNet purchased from Providence Equity Partners, a major investor in MetroNet. MetroNet Share Purchase Terms: If AT&T Corp. does not purchase the outstanding MetroNet shares before June 30, 2000, the minimum C$75 per share price will increase by 16 percent per annum compounded quarterly from that date through no later than June 30, 2003. Before June 30, 2003, AT&T Corp. may also designate an alternate purchaser for all MetroNet shares at the higher of that minimum price and the then appraised fair market value. If by June 30, 2003, AT&T Corp. has not purchased the outstanding MetroNet shares, those shares would be sold through an auction process and AT&T Corp. would make whole the shareholders of MetroNet for the difference between the proceeds received from the auction and the greater of the accreted minimum price and the appraised fair market value of the shares. No Shop Provisions: Both companies have agreed not to solicit or take certain other actions with respect to any competing proposal. MetroNet has agreed to pay AT&T Corp. a break-up fee of $75 million if, under specified conditions, the transaction is not completed. Support Agreements: Certain major MetroNet shareholders have entered into agreements with AT&T Corp. under which they have agreed to support the transaction. Fairness: MetroNet's board was provided with fairness opinions by both Salomon Smith Barney and RBC Dominion Securities. Accounting: It is anticipated that the merger will be accounted for as a purchase with a portion of the purchase price to be allocated to intangible assets including goodwill. The actual allocation of purchase price and selection of amortization periods is subject to further evaluation. Stock Price Collar: None. Board Approval: Has been approved by the companies' boards. Shareholder Approval: Approval is required by MetroNet shareholders and will be sought at a shareholder meeting expected to be held in May, 1999. Board of Directors: New board for MetroNet Communications with 12 members on which AT&T Corp. will have 4 seats upon the consummation of the transaction. Conditions: The transaction is subject to approval by MetroNet shareholders, regulatory and court approvals, required consents, and other customary closing conditions. Merger Consummation: Expected by the end of the second quarter of 1999. Merger of AT&T Canada and MetroNet Communications Summary of Combined Company Combined Company Name: AT&T Canada Corp. Estimated 1999 Revenues: Approximately $1.4 billion (85% from business customers). Property, Plant and Equipment: Nearly $2.0 billion. Total Assets: More than $3.5 billion. Total Employees: More than 4,000. Sales Employees: More than 700. Local Service Access Lines: Approximately 200,000. Long Distance Minutes: Approximately 5 billion. Internet subscribers: Approximately 165,000. Buildings Accessed: Over 2,400. Fiber Optic Intracity Route Kilometres: More than 3,800. Fiber Optic Long Distance Route Kilometres: Nearly 16,000 (includes intercity and cross border fibre routes currently being constructed by MetroNet). Frame Relay Switches: More than 70. ATM Switches: More than 400. About AT&T Canada Corp.: AT&T Canada Corp., a pioneer in competitive long distance, is a national, facilities-based telecommunications carrier serving business and residential customers with a variety of long-distance voice and data services. AT&T Canada delivers service from 147 offices across the country, including 40 sales offices. ACC TelEnterprises, a member of the AT&T Canada family, is one of Canada's largest resellers of telecommunications services, including long distance, Internet, paging, toll free, local line and data services, and is a particularly strong competitor in the university, affinity and small business markets. More information about AT&T Canada can be found on the company's web site at: www.attcanada.com. About MetroNet Communications: Built for Business(TM), MetroNet Communications is Canada's first national provider of local telecommunications services and the country's largest competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC). Deploying the most advanced fibre-optic networking and switching platforms, MetroNet offers business and government customers across the country a full suite of local and long distance voice, data and Internet services - with one point of contact, excellent customer service and competitive pricing. MetroNet is a public company with its common stock traded on the Toronto and Montreal stock exchanges under the symbol MNC.B and on the NASDAQ National Market System under the symbol METNF. Visit MetroNet's web site, www.metronet.ca, for more information about the company. Forward Looking Statements: This press release contains statements about expected future events and financial results that are forward-looking in nature and subject to risks and uncertainties, including satisfaction of the conditions to the transaction and the successful integration of MetroNet Communications, AT&T Canada, and ACC TelEnterprises. For those statements, we claim the protection of the safe harbor for forward-looking statements provisions contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Discussion of additional factors that may affect future results is contained in MetroNet Communications' recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Canadian Securities Commissions. Press Conference Scheduled: MetroNet Communications and AT&T Canada will hold a joint press conference at 11:00 a.m. (Eastern Time) this morning at The News Theatre, 98 The Esplanade, Toronto. Senior management from both companies will discuss the announcement and, following brief statements, will respond to questions. Live coverage of the press conference, followed by B-roll, is available via satellite on Anik E2C/3B, downlink 3280 Mhz (vertical), Channel 6, Audio sub-carriers 6.8 & 6.2. A live audio bridge to the press conference will also be available by calling 1-888-209-3766 (within North America) or 1-212-271-4742 (outside North America). Rebroadcasts of the audio conference will be available at 1p.m. EST by calling 1-800-558-5253, using the passcode 1897892. For technical information: News Theatre 416-361-0070 ext. 237. For further information: on AT&T Canada: Ian Dale, Vice President, Corporate Communications, (416) 204-2773, iandale@att.com, Web Site: http://www.attcanada.com, on MetroNet Communications: Investors and Analysts: Bruce M. Mann, Vice President, Investor Relations, (416) 640-6777, brucemann@metronet.ca, Media: Drew Van Parys, Director, Marketing Communications, (416) 640-9030, drewvanparys@metronet.ca, Web Site: http://www.metronet.ca Release sent courtesy of Canada NewsWire Portfolio Email. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 10:49:15 -0500 From: John R. Covert Subject: German Hotel Phone Rates (Sheraton is Not the Only Offender) Mr. Barry Sternlicht President Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide P.O. Box 141609 Austin, Texas 78714-1609 Dear Mr. Sternlicht: I am writing to you about absurd local telephone charges at the Sheraton Frankfurt (Airport) Hotel. I stayed in this hotel for four nights in December and enjoyed the convenient location but not the fact that making local calls within Frankfurt was more expensive than calling Frankfurt from the United States. Consider the call highlighted in orange on the attached bill. This was a local call, within Frankfurt, to 73998611. It was charged at a rate of DM 13.60 or $8.34 for just 23 1/2 minutes. If I had made that call to Frankfurt from my home telephone in Massachusetts by dialing 1010297, I would have only paid $5.96 including both state and federal tax. In Germany, this local call is what is known as a CityCall, made at the daytime rate of one DM 0.12 unit per 90 seconds. The rate that the hotel had to pay the local phone company for this local call was DM 1.92, or $1.18. The hotel is adding surcharges of 600% to all telephone calls, charging seven times the actual price of a call. For years, travelers in Germany have been used to surcharges of 100% to 300% on calls made from hotels. When the local PTT charged DM 0.23 per unit, it was common for hotels to charge DM 0.50 to DM 0.70 for each unit used from guest rooms. The rates charged by Telekom in Germany have been restructured, and the price per unit is now DM 0.12, but the length of time allowed for each unit is less. The Sheraton in Frankfurt charges DM 0.85 for each DM 0.12 unit. This is ridiculous! Over 600% profit, and with no labor costs! You may verify local (city) German telephone rates at http://www.telekom.de/untern/tarife/inland/city/index.htm Also please consider the call within Germany highlighted in yellow. Again, we have Sheraton's 600% surcharge, making this 8 minute call to a town a few miles outside Frankfurt cost $18.24 instead of the $2.57 which Telekom charged the hotel. An eight minute call to anywhere within Germany using the roaming rates charged by my mobile phone provider costs less, only $12.44 including tax! As you can see, I spent DM 376 ($230) per night for lodging in this hotel. There can be no justification for such egregious gouging in the telephone rates charged. I would suggest that you might have the hotel lower its per unit charge from DM 0.85 to DM 0.35. That would still provide a profit of 192%, which would be much more reasonable than the 608% profit in Sheraton's current rates. On the attached bill there are DM 166.60 ($102.17) in telephone charges, which represent an actual cost to the hotel of DM 23.52 ($14.42). At a 200% profit, Sheraton would have charged me $43.26. The additional charge over and above this "reasonable" 200% profit was $58.91, which I consider outrageous. I expect to stay in the Frankfurt Sheraton two more times this year, and I hope that I will find more reasonable telephone rates on my future visits. Sincerely, John R. Covert ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 01:09:24 -0800 From: Linc Madison Subject: CPUC Staff Recommends OVERLAYS for 415, 510 A story in the Thursday, March 4, issue of the {San Francisco Chronicle} reports that the California Public Utilities Commission staff has issued a formal recommendation that overlays be instituted in the 415 (San Francisco and Marin) and 510 (Oakland, Berkeley, Hayward) area codes. The proposed dates are: NPA "permissive" 1+10D mandatory 1+10D overlay activated 415 01/22/2000 10/14/2000 01/20/2001 510 06/15/1999 04/15/2000 07/15/2000 (I have "permissive" in quotes above, since both NPAs, and the entire state of California, already have permissive 1+10D on all calls, by law.) The numerics, of course, have not yet been officially determined. The CPUC is expected to rule on the recommendations on April 1st. The Chronicle indicates that the Commission is expected to approve the staff recommendation. Interestingly, this was top headline on the Chronicle, but not even mentioned in Thursday evening's Examiner. (It is possible that it was reported in Wednesday's Examiner; I didn't see it.) The Chron and the Examiner are online at Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom@LincMad.com URL: < http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits ------------------------------ Subject: Telephone Companies Vow to Keep Lines Open on Y2K Day Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 22:19:46 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) By Steve Jordon, Omaha World-Herald, Neb. Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Mar. 3 -- When Jan. 1, 2000, arrives, don't try to call Aunt Minnie in Minnetonka. That day, phone companies expect, will be like the mother of all Mother's Days -- nearly everyone will try to telephone someone to talk about what they're doing as the calendar turns to the next thousand. Some will even pick up the telephone just to see whether it works. "There will potentially be a slow dial tone, but that doesn't mean anything's wrong," said Karla Ewert, a spokeswoman for US West. "It's like everybody trying to get to Lincoln on a football Saturday. It doesn't mean the Interstate's not working. It's just crowded." While a flood of start-of-the-century calls is inevitable, US West and other telephone companies say they are working hard to solve the really big potential question: Will the nation's telephone system work when the date changes from 1999 to 2000? Today, US West and six other big telephone companies will issue a report saying that they believe 2000 will arrive without major disruptions to the nation's telephone system. After six months of testing telephone systems in laboratories, the companies say, they're confident that the calls will go through, no matter what the date. The telephone issue is part of the wider year 2000 problem. Many of the nation's computers and computer software programs run the risk of failing or making mistakes as 2000 rolls around because early computer chips and programs show only the last two digits of the date, such as 99 for 1999, to save memory space. The problem, known as the Y2K bug, could cause some computers to misinterpret years in the next century, since they don't read the first two digits of the date. The seven telephone companies formed the Telco Year 2000 Forum to share information on the problem. Today they will hold a press conference in Washington to let the public know what they are doing to resolve it. The other members of the forum are Ameritech, Bell Atlantic, BellSouth, Cincinnati Bell, GTE and SBC Communications Inc. They represent 90 percent of the telephone lines in the country. From July to December the forum tested 1,914 date- and time-sensitive operations in laboratories, turning up six "Year 2000-related anomalies." The forum said it resolved the six problems, and none of them would have affected the calls being processed. Based on those results, said Gerry Roth, vice chairman of the forum, the companies have achieved the goal of what they call their interoperability testing initiative. The testing took place in 20 laboratories to simulate actual telephone network activity. Gene Chiappetta, chairman of the forum, said the testing confirms that the telephone companies and their suppliers will handle voice and data transmission after Jan. 1 without significant disruptions. William White, executive director of US West's Year 2000 Initiative and a member of the forum, said, "We're in good shape. This testing means that US West customers will have a working dial tone, as usual, when the new millennium arrives." The tests were managed by DMR Consulting Group Inc., an information technology service firm. The tests included emergency services; basic, enhanced and intelligent services; management systems; and data transport systems. The tests looked at dates as they changed from Dec. 31, 1999, to Jan. 1, 2000; from Feb. 28, 2000, to Feb. 29, 2000; and Feb. 29, 2000, to March 1, 2000. ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course: "Design Patterns, Frameworks, and CORBA" Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 11:10:35 -0800 On June 2-4, 1999, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Using Design Patterns, Frameworks, and CORBA to Develop Object-Oriented Communication Systems", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructor is Douglas C. Schmidt, PhD, Associate Professor, Computer Science Department, Washington University. This course describes OOD/OOP techniques and software that have been successfully used to reduce the complexity of developing large-scale concurrent communication software. These systems include online transaction processing, telecommunication switch management applications, network management for large-scale global personal communication systems, electronic medical imaging systems, and high-performance parallel communication protocol stacks, among others. The course illustrates how to significantly simplify and enhance the development of software that effectively utilizes concurrency and network services via the use of object-oriented design techniques such as design patterns, layered modularity, and information hiding; C++ language features such as abstract classes; inheritance, dynamic binding, and parameterized types; tools such as object-oriented communication frameworks and object request brokers (ORBs); advanced operating system mechanisms such as event de-multiplexing, multi-threading, multi-processing, and explicit dynamic linking; and emerging standards for distributed object computing such as OMG CORBA and Network OLE/COM. The course is intended for software developers who design and implement telecommunication switch management systems, video-on-demand services, network management applications, personal communication systems, client/server management information systems, WWW servers, upper-layer communication protocols, and other similar services. UCLA Extension has presented this highly successful short course since 1997. The fee for the course is $1295, which includes extensive course notes. These course notes are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #28 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 5 14:13:44 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA02235; Fri, 5 Mar 1999 14:13:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 14:13:44 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903051913.OAA02235@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #29 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Mar 99 14:13:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 29 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson US West Files Suit Against Firms For Switching Customers' Service (T Cook) Pentium III-only Websites Coming (Monty Solomon) Cracking Tools Get Smarter (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "The Race for Bandwidth", Cary Lu (Rob Slade) Wireless Glossary & New Publication (Aran Crowe) History Wanted on 999 System (L69999@aol.com) What is the Hard Drive Space of Vox and Wave Files? (Terry Watkins) Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel (Garrett Wollman) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (John Nagle) Re: FCC Ruling on Access Charges to ISPs (Eric Florack) Net-Way Phone Number (Marvin E. Kurtti) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: US West Files Suit against Firms for Switching Customers' Service Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 16:21:21 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) By Mike McPhee, The Denver Post Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Mar. 3--US West Inc. has sued five companies it claims have masqueraded as US West in an attempt to get customers to change their long-distance providers. In some cases, the lawsuits charge, the companies switch the customers' carriers without their permission. The lawsuits, filed in U.S. District Court in Denver, claim that the customers thought they were signing up for a simplified billing program and ended up having their phone service illegally switched, a process known in the industry as "slamming." Salesmen for the companies offer to combine the customers' local and long-distance phone bills, according to the lawsuit. They tell customers that new government rules require separate bills for local and long-distance calls unless the customers sign up for combined bills. But there are no such rules. "Twentieth-century snake-oil salesmen is what they are," said US West spokesman Jerry Brown on Tuesday. "We've really seen a proliferation of that kind of company. And the way to stop them is to go after them." US West has asked for a court injunction to stop immediately the practice. It also wants the five companies to be forced to pay damages and to reimburse the customers for long-distance charges. The companies are Inmark Inc., doing business as Preferred Billing Inc. of St. Paul, Minn.; Least Cost Routing Inc., doing business as Long Distance Charges Inc. of Santa Ana, Calif.; Business Discount Plan Inc. of Long Beach, Calif.; Vista Group International Inc., doing business as Vista Communications of Westlake, Ohio; and Long Distance Consolidated Billing Co. of Franklin, Mich. Long Distance Charges' telephone has been disconnected. The other four companies could not be reached for comment. US West estimates nearly 750,000 customers have been switched illegally in the past two years. US West has filed similar lawsuits against long-distance service resellers in Washington and Wyoming. A federal judge in Spokane, Wash., recently issued an injunction to prevent One Step Billing Inc. of Boca Raton, Fla., from using US West trademarks in solicitation. Several customers have joined US West in the lawsuits, including some residential communities in Arizona and Colorado, Machining Data Technologies Inc. of Montana, and Feldberg Designs Corp. of Bellingham, Wash. "I'd like to see them out of business and no more companies like that in business," said Dana Brown, who manages the 350-unit Thunderbird Retirement Resort in Glendale, Ariz. He alleged a Business Discount Plan representative switched the resort's long-distance company without permission after speaking with a teenage receptionist on a busy afternoon. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 11:57:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Pentium III-only Websites Coming http://www.mactimes.com/bin/news/index.pl?read=1188 By Charles W. Moore 4 March 1999, at 8:55 a.m. Here's an ominous note from the land of Oz. David Flynn of IT Fairfax reports that Intel is working with several Australian firms to establish Web sites that are not only optimised for PCs based on the Pentium III processor but, get this: *restricted to Pentium III machines.* http://www.it.fairfax.com.au/990302/hardware/hardware3.html In the future, these Web sites will probe the computer trying to access the site and use the chip's Processor Serial Number (PSN) to determine if it is a Pentium III. However, at the outset exclusivity will be maintained by the Websites "interrogating the processor" to obtain a CPU ID which identifies the chip as a Pentium II or a Pentium III (or a Mac). Ostensibly the objective is to privide Pentium III users with special pages where content such as streaming media, 3D interfaces and animation have been peak-tuned to suit Intel's latest processor, and showcasing the Pentium III and its 70 new instructions. However, some perceive more sinister undertones, such as locking out the competition, which not only includes Macs, but also upstart PC chips like those made by AMD, which has been hurting Intel sales badly of late. "The basic premise is that if you have a Pentium III-based PC your Internet experience will be greatly enhanced," Angelo Lo Certo, Intel's advertising and Internet marketing manager for Asia Pacific told Flynn. Right, and the corollary is that if you don't have a Pentium III your Internet experience will be diminished by design. At this point I want to put on my commentator's hat. Folks, this is a bad, bad, BAD idea. It's the thin edge of the wedge, but we could end up seeing the Internet carved up into proprietary ghettos designed to serve selfish corporate commercial interests -- the road to the sort of Big-Brotherdom that the anti-trust lawyers have accused Microsoft of. Indeed M$ has dabbled in the idea of promoting Websites that can only be accessed properly with Internet Explorer. You would think that Intel, which reportedly is the next partner on the DOJ's anti-trust dance card, would be a bit more circumspect with this sort of thinly-disguised chicanery. Perhaps that's the reason they're trying it out in Australia first. Flynn says that Australia is one of several countries where Pentium III only sites will debut around March. The PR spin Intel is putting on this scheme is that it is not designed to persuade buyers to choose a machine with the Pentium III inside, but rather as an after-sales perk to reward those who do. Grasp the distinction? Intel have a comments form on their Website. Why not let them know what you think of this initiative, politely of course? http://www.intel.com/feedback.htm Let your voices be heard! Email us with your opinion at feedback@mactimes.com. ------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh gosh, those Intel people and their Australian associates must really think they are something special. Web sites from which most of us will be excluded, eh? Well this is not 1994 when there were a grand total of a couple hundred websites around the world and everyone clamoring to check them all out, etc. Now there are umpty-billion of them, and I get several pieces of spam mail daily urging me to check out the newest web sites, enroll for membership, etc. How many are out there giving free email accounts, twenty or fifty megs of storage to do your own thing, and all the free web page construction tools one could ever want? Naturally since all of you readers are like myself and have 24 hours per day seven days per week to sit in front of your computer checking out every new page that comes along and gathering up email from all your web- based email accounts and downloading humongous amounts of free soft- ware for every concievable purpose you'll have a lot of left over time to get on your hands and knees and beg those Australians to let you please look at their web pages and participate in the thrill of getting your downloads a couple seconds faster than everyone else. My goodness ... aren't we way past the days of 'you cannot come to my web page, as I look down my nose, your system is not good enough ...' It is getting to be uncommon even to see messages on web pages saying 'this page looks best when viewed with ' ... although it happens. Even though in general I disapprove of the rampant commercial- ization of the net over the past few years, I can understand and will accept a site which is used soley to promote the commercial interests of its owners, but you invite everyone in to look, you do not tell them to keep out. Well, if/when they get their site(s) up and running, why don't we all put up links to them coming from everywhere; that would drive them crazy, constantly having to chase people away wouldn't it? .. and label all of our links, "Hot Stuff! Must Check it out Now!" PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:44:47 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Cracking Tools Get Smarter http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/18219.html Cracking Tools Get Smarter by Chris Oakes 3:00 a.m. 3.Mar.99.PST The cracker's screwdriver has become more of a Swiss Army knife, his F-16 more of a stealth bomber. With awe and alarm, security analysts have observed the capabilities of Nmap, a network-scanning program that crackers are now using to plot increasingly cunning attacks. "Just before Christmas, we detected a new [network] scanning pattern we'd never seen before," said John Green, a security expert on the "Shadow" intrusion-detection team at the US Navy's Naval Surface Warfare Center. "Other sites have seen the same activity. The problem was, no one knew what was causing it." Green made the remarks Tuesday in an online briefing hosted by the SANS Institute, a nonprofit network-security research and education organization. The group held the briefing to alert network administrators of the alarming increase in the strategies of network attacks. The culprit software prowling outside the doors of networks participating in the study is Nmap, an existing software utility used by administrators to analyze networks. In the hands of intruders, security analysts discovered, Nmap is a potent tool for sniffing out holes and network services that are ripe for attack. The analysts didn't look for actual damage that was carried out. Instead, they silently watched as various networks were scanned by untraceable Nmap users. "The intelligence that can be garnered using Nmap is extensive," Green said. "Everything that the wily hacker needs to know about your system is there." Rather than feel in the dark to penetrate network "ports" at random, Nmap allows intruders to perform much more precise assaults. The implications are a bit unnerving for the network community. The tool makes planning network intrusions more effective, while simultaneously bringing this sophistication to a wider audience of crackers. "It takes a lot of the brute force out of hacking," said Green. "It allows [intruders] to map hosts and target systems that might be vulnerable." And that should result in a higher success rate for attempted intrusions. "I think we're going to see more coordinated attacks. You can slowly map an entire network, while not setting off your detection system," said software developer H. D. Moore, who debriefed network analysts at the conference. But Moore is part of the solution. He authored Nlog, software that automatically logs activity at a network's ports and parlays it to a database. Weekly checks of the database enable the user to tell if someone is performing an Nmap analysis. Nlog serves as a companion tool to Nmap. Just like intruders, administrators can use Nmap to detect their own network weaknesses, then plug the holes. Prevention is the only defense, Green and Moore said. There is no other known way to combat an Nmap-planned network attack. "Right now it's basically a suffer-along scenario," Green said. But, at least, Nmap lets administrators "know what the hackers know about you." Copyright 1994-99 Wired Digital Inc. All rights reserved. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 10:12:58 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "The Race for Bandwidth", Cary Lu Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKRFBUDT.RVW 990131 "The Race for Bandwidth", Cary Lu, 1998, 1-57231-513-X, U$19.99/C$26.99/UK#18.49 %A Cary Lu %C 1 Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052-6399 %D 1998 %G 1-57231-513-X %I Microsoft Press %O U$19.99/C$26.99/UK#18.49 800-MSPRESS (6777377) fax: 206-936-7329 %P 199 p. %T "The Race for Bandwidth: Understanding Data Transmission" There is no statement of purpose or audience for this book, which makes a critique of it somewhat difficult. Chapter one provides a somewhat-simpler-than-layman's level explanation of bandwidth as a measure of information transmission. There is a scanty overview of the range of bandwidth requirements for different technologies, with a few mistakes (one comparison is off by a factor of fifty). However, there is also some social analysis of what the increase in bandwidth availability means, that may be missing from some purely technical discussions of the topic. The history of communications given in chapter two is simple, though probably interesting to the neophyte. There are still a number of minor errors, such as the dates of the first inception of the Internet, and the first fax transmission, that make other details sometimes suspect. Various ways of looking at bandwidth, and the tradeoffs to be made (with an interesting variation on "never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of mag tapes") comprise chapter three. There is also a good discussion of analogue and digital information. This is extended in chapter four with some comparisons of analogue bandwidths for various media, although it is unfortunate that the comparisons are not fully carried over into the digital realm. This is the more untoward since chapters five and six move into specifics of the audio and video standards for North America and Europe, and quickly become more technical than the prior background really supports. (It is also unclear what the point of these two chapter is.) The same holds true for chapter seven, which looks at the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN), cellular, and modem technologies, as opposed to the broadcast concentrations in five and six. Chapter eight reviews a number of very important aspects of packet data networks such as the Internet, although, again, some of the significance of the discussion will be lost on some readers because of sections missing from the background information. An afterword closes out the book by noting that we will continue to want more bandwidth, more will become available, and that not every piece of information that we want is or will be available for transmission or access. Clearly, this book is not suitable for professionals. Too much is missing for those who really have to make informed decisions. For the amateur, wanting to start to get a handle on communications technology, the book holds much greater promise. It does not get bogged down in technical details, and it does stop to look at social and political issues along the way. While not always completely reliable in its presentation of the technology, it is certainly readable and entertaining. For those wanting to get a "feel," rather than a working knowledge, this is worth consideration. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKRFBUDT.RVW 990131 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Find virus, book info http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm Mirrored at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/rms.htm Linked to bookstore at http://www97.pair.com/robslade/ Comp Sec Weekly: http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/computer_security Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Subject: Wireless Glossary and New Publication From: mrman2636@yahoo.com (Aran Crowe) Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 13:44:24 -0700 An online wireless telecommunications glossary is now available at: http://www.cnp-wireless.com/glossary.html For those with a sense of humour, there is a list of tongue-in-cheek expansions of common acronyms at: http://www.cnp-wireless.com/acronyms.html Information on a new technical bulletin on Wireless Security, with a heavy emphasis on standards is available at: http://www.cnp-wireless.com/djws.html David Crowe Editor Cellular Networking Perspectives and Dr. Jon's Wireless Security ------------------------------ From: L69999@aol.com Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 17:18:15 EST Subject: History Wanted on 999 System Hi everyone, A friend of mine is doing a project on the emergency services, and she is looking for the history of the 999 system. Can you kind folk help in anyway, please. Many Thanks, Lee [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For those not familiar with it, '999' is the equivilent in the UK (and other European countries?) to '911' in the United States. I do not know if anyone has done a comprehensive history write up on either. Answers from anyone? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Terry Watkins Subject: What is the Hard Drive Space of Vox and Wave Files? Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 22:37:57 -0600 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions here! What is the hard drive space requirements of wav and vox files? Say per minute? Thanks. Please email to: terry@av1611.org ------------------------------ From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: 5 Mar 1999 03:36:58 GMT Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , Derek Balling wrote: > You buy something online. They require you to have a PSN enabled. This scenario is totally ludicrous from the start. I buy something online. In order to complete the transaction, I am expected to run a program which will identify my CPU, and paste it into a Web form? Given how much Internet commerce depends on drooling lusers, how many people would be likely to comply? Those who are concerned about their on-line privacy already employ countermeasures. Anyone who is watching my Web browsing will learn absolutely nothing about me, other than the fact that I use a Squid object cache (and I'd like to find a way to turn that off). For all those idiots who play games on their Web sites looking at the User-Agent request header, they'll be mighty confused to discover that it claims to be ``ANONYM/1.0 (ITS; KL-10)''. Since my cache is used by many members of this Lab, not even its IP address will tell a server anything. (Of course, cookies and other nonsense are deleted automagically. If Microsoft adds a new request header to Internet Exploder, `X-Intel-Processor-Serial-Number', my cache will automatically delete it.) > Always remember -- applications talk to the hardware via the kernel. If > the kernel tells you the PSN is 696969696969-0042, then you're going to > dutifuly report it as such. :) Unlikely, since CPUID (which is the instruction I assume Intel used for this purpose) is not a privileged instruction. On the whole, this is probably a good idea. I might prefer something a bit more random than a serial number (a 128-bit random string would be nice), but I expect it to have no practical impact on anyone, including software pirates. (The pirates just copy the CD-ROM installation media, which is not CPU-specific!) Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same wollman@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Organization: ICGNetcom Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 19:13:31 GMT Billy Harvey writes: > Thomas A. Horsley writes: >> You know, it seems to me ethernet boards have had unique IDs for years >> and years and years, but no privacy groups ever hollered about that. >> I think the mistake Intel made was the spin they put on the initial >> descriptions of the silly ID number -- as a way to track e-commerce >> activity (a thing most individual consumers don't care about other >> than the negative big-brother aspects). True. Apple is about to get hit on this. It turns out that Apple has apparently been recording iMac serial numbers on an unused sector of the hard drive. Look over in "comp.sys.mac.programming" for details. It's worse than the Intel problem; Apple puts the same serial number barcoded on the carton and on the hard drive, so the serial number that identifies the machine when sold is the same one it has stored internally. Now that's consumer control. John Nagle ------------------------------ From: Eric Florack Organization: Free File Farm BBS Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 18:24:31 -0500 Subject: Re: FCC Ruling on Access Charges to ISPs Greetings to all; first response in around a year; Jay R. Ashworth says in issue #26: > Monty quotes the NY Times: >> WASHINGTON -- A computer user's dial-up calls to the Internet are >> interstate communications subject to federal jurisidiction, federal >> regulators concluded on Thursday. >> Until now, Internet dial-ups have been treated as local calls. > Alas, the Times has gotten it wrong, courtesy of the AP. Well, ok, they > didn't quite "get it wrong", but the copy is misleading, for the purpose > everyone wants to use it for. > For the past decade or more now, there has been a perceived running > threat that the FCC would decide that people who operate big > incoming-only modem pools (you know: BBSs and ISPs) should be treated > like long distance companies, and required to pay per-minute fees to > Local Exchange Carriers. The opposite stance, of course, has been: > "we're customers, and we follow the letter of the regulations; why > should we be classified any differently than any other big company with > lots of phone lines?" > The issue, of course, is that if ISPs start being charged by the minute > for their incoming calls, flat rate Internet access is dead. That is, perhaps, the first issue that one thinks of. But the larger issue here seems to me the extension of unelected federal bureucratic power, or at least the maintainence of it. Consider the amount of communications activity that without this 'ruling' would fall outside the power of our all-knowing, all powerful federal government. I submit that given the consequences for ruling the other direction; In effect that the ISP is not an IXC, the Federal government would lose all that power, the idea that flat-rate internet is gone, and the telcos make money hand over fist is a nice little secondary issue. (A happy one for the fed, since theywill also be pulling in a fair amount of increased taxes in the deal.) > The comment I'd recommend is: "the universe in question is _voice > telephone calls_, cause that's what the regs talk about. The fact that > there's a modem on the voice line is immaterial to the way the regs are > written, and pursuant to the regs, the call is inTRAstate. End of > story." The argument they'll return with is; how much in the way of voice traffic is already on the net? Of course what they fail to see is what drove the voice traffic on the net in the firstplace; the tax structure, and the government controls on things which forced us to pay more in the first place. Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that each time the technology comes along to free us from government regulation, the government always seems to find a way to step in and wrest control of it from us again? ____________________________ ___________________________________ /Eric Florack, SysOp of the /\ / eflorack@servtech.com Or: /\ / FREE FILE FARM BBS / /\ / bignasty@billsfan.net / /\ /716-352-6544 or 352-1629 / \/ / http://www.servtech.com/~eflorack/ \/ /GT Net 041/003 and 041/007 /\ / DEMOCRATS LIE. Any Questions? /\ /___________________________/ / /_________________________________/ / \___________________________\/ \_________________________________\/ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ------------------------------ From: mkurtti@hiwaay.net (Marvin E. Kurtti) Subject: Net-Way Phone Number Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 08:17:26 -0600 Organization: mk Computers This morning on CNN I saw an ad from a stock broker that showed their phone number as 800.555.1234. Marv [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not certain what you mean by your term 'net-way' ... but I can tell you I do not think I would care to have such a phone number, at least not with charges being paid for with my money. There are too many people getting '1212' confused with '1234' when they dial toll-free directory assistance, and there are many people who would use an example such as his number when they write out a presumably 'ficticious' number for illustration purposes. I wonder if anyone anywhere has ever been assigned '310-555-2368', the number which for many years appeared in the front pages of phone directories as an example of long distance direct dialing? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #29 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 5 17:04:23 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA11578; Fri, 5 Mar 1999 17:04:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 17:04:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903052204.RAA11578@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #30 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Mar 99 17:04:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 30 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson A Growing Compatibility Issue: Computers and Privacy (Monty Solomon) Spotlight Put on Unix Design Flaw (Monty Solomon) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (John R. Levine) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Ryan Tucker) Re: E911 Illinois Requirements (David W. Pfister) Re: E911 Illinois Requirements (Tony Zafiropoulos) Re: German Hotel Phone Rates (Sheraton Not Only Offender) (Allan Kerman) Re: Last Laugh! Russians Bomb Sanford's Company (Clifton T. Sharp Jr.) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:30:37 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Growing Compatibility Issue: Computers and Privacy http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/03/biztech/articles/03privacy.html March 3, 1999 A Growing Compatibility Issue in the Digital Age: Computers and Their Users' Privacy By JOHN MARKOFF SAN FRANCISCO -- The Intel Corporation recently blinked in a confrontation with privacy advocates protesting the company's plans to ship its newest generation of microprocessors with an embedded serial number that could be used to identify a computer -- and by extension, its user. But those on each side of the dispute acknowledge that it was only an initial skirmish in a wider struggle. From computers to cellular phones to digital video players, everyday devices and software programs increasingly embed telltale identifying numbers that let them interact. Whether such digital fingerprints constitute an imminent privacy threat or are simply part of the foundation of advanced computer systems and networks is the subject of a growing debate between the computer industry and privacy groups. At its heart is a fundamental disagreement over the role of electronic anonymity in a democratic society. Privacy groups argue fiercely that the merger of computers and the Internet has brought the specter of a new surveillance society in which it will be difficult to find any device that cannot be traced to the user when it is used. But a growing alliance of computer industry executives, engineers, law enforcement officials and scholars contend that absolute anonymity is not only increasingly difficult to obtain technically, but is also a potential threat to democratic order because of the possibility of electronic crime and terrorism. "You already have zero privacy -- get over it," Scott McNealy, chairman and chief executive of Sun Microsystems, said at a recent news conference held to introduce the company's newest software, known as Jini, intended to interconnect virtually all types of electronic devices from computers to cameras. Privacy advocates contend that software like Jini, which assigns an identification number to each device each time it connects to a network, could be misused as networks envelop almost everyone in society in a dense web of devices that see, hear, and monitor behavior and location. "Once information becomes available for one purpose there is always pressure from other organizations to use it for their purposes," said Lauren Weinstein, editor of Privacy Forum, an online journal. This week, a programmer in Massachusetts found that identifying numbers can easily be found in word processing and spreadsheet files created with Microsoft's popular Word and Excel programs and in the Windows 95 and 98 operating systems. Moreover, unlike the Intel serial number, which the computer user can conceal, the numbers used by the Microsoft programs -- found in millions of personal computers -- cannot be controlled by the user. The programmer, Richard M. Smith, president of Phar Lap Software, a developer of computer programming tools in Cambridge, Mass., noticed that the Windows operating system contains a unique registration number stored on each personal computer in a small data base known as the Windows registry. His curiosity aroused, Smith investigated further and found that the number that uniquely identifies his computer to the network used in most office computing systems, known as the Ethernet, was routinely copied to each Microsoft Word or Excel document he created. The number is used to create a longer number, known as a globally unique identifier. It is there, he said, to enable computer users to create sophisticated documents comprising word processing, spreadsheet, presentation and data base information. Each of those components in a document needs a separate identity, and computer designers have found the Ethernet number a convenient and widely available identifier, he said. But such universal identifiers are of particular concern to privacy advocates because they could be used to compile information on individuals from many data bases. "The infrastructure relies a lot on serial numbers," Smith said. "We've let the genie out of the bottle." Jeff Ressler, a Microsoft product manager, said that if a computer did not have an Ethernet adaptor then another identifying number was generated that was likely to be unique. "We need a big number which is a unique identifier," he said. "If we didn't have, it would be impossible to make our software programs work together across networks." Indeed, an increasing range of technologies have provisions for identifying their users for either technical reasons (such as connecting to a network) or commercial ones (such as determining which ads to show to Web surfers). But engineers and network designers argue that identity information is a vital aspect of modern security design because it is necessary to authenticate an individual in a network, thereby preventing fraud or intrusion. Last month at the introduction of Intel's powerful Pentium III chip, Intel executives showed more than a dozen data security uses for the serial number contained electronically in each of the chips, ranging from limiting access to protecting documents or software against piracy. Intel, the largest chip maker, had recently backed down somewhat after it was challenged by privacy advocates over the identity feature, agreeing that at least some processors for the consumer market would be made in a way that requires the user to activate the feature. Far from scaling back its vision, however, Intel said it was planning an even wider range of features in its chips to help companies protect copyrighted materials. It also pointed to software applications that would use the embedded number to identify participants in electronic chat rooms on the Internet and thereby, for example, protect children from Internet stalkers. The trade-off: Advanced systems require a profusion of ID numbers. But in achieving those goals, it would also create a universal identifier, which could be used by software applications to track computer users wherever they surfed on the World Wide Web. And that, despite the chip maker's assertions that it is working to enhance security and privacy, has led some privacy advocates to taunt Intel and accuse it of a "Big Brother Inside" strategy. They contend that by uniquely identifying each computer it will make it possible for marketers or Government and law enforcement officials to track the activities of anyone connected to a computer network more closely. They also say that such a permanent identifier could be used in a similar fashion to the data, known as "cookies," that are placed on a computer's hard drive by Web sites to track the comings and goings of Internet users. Putting Privacy on the Defensive. Intel's decision to forge ahead with identity features in its chip technology may signal a turning point in the battle over privacy in the electronic age. Until now, privacy concerns have generally put industry executives on the defensive. Now questions are being raised about whether there should be limits to privacy in an Internet era. "Judge Brandeis's definition of privacy was 'the right to be left alone,' not the right to operate in absolute secrecy," said Paul Saffo, a researcher at the Institute for the Future in Menlo Park, Calif. Some Silicon Valley engineers and executives say that the Intel critics are being naive and have failed to understand that all devices connected to computer networks require identification features simply to function correctly. Moreover, they note that identifying numbers have for more than two decades been a requirement for any computer connected to an Ethernet network. (Although still found most widely in office settings, Ethernet connections are increasingly being used for high-speed Internet service in the home via digital telephone lines and cable modems.) All of Apple Computer's popular iMac machines come with an Ethernet connection that has a unique permanent number installed in the factory. The number is used to identify the computer to the local network. While the Ethernet number is not broadcast over the Internet at large, it could easily be discovered by a software application like a Web browser and transmitted to a remote Web site tracking the identities of its users, a number of computer engineers said. Moreover, they say that other kinds of networks require identity numbers to protect against fraud. Each cellular telephone currently has two numbers: the telephone number, which can easily be changed, and an electronic serial number, which is permanently put in place at the factory to protect against theft or fraud. The serial number is accessible to the cellular telephone network, and as cellular telephones add Internet browsing and E-mail capabilities, it will potentially have the same identity capability as the Intel processor serial number. Other examples include DIVX DVD disks, which come with a serial number that permits tracking the use of each movie by a centralized network-recording system managed by the companies that sell the disks. Fearing the Misuse of All Those Numbers ... Industry executives say that as the line between communications and computing becomes increasingly blurred, every electronic device will require some kind of identification to attach to the network. Making those numbers available to networks that need to pass information or to find a mobile user while at the same time denying the information to those who wish to gather information into vast data bases may be an impossible task. Privacy advocates argue that even if isolated numbers look harmless, they are actually harbingers of a trend toward ever more invasive surveillance networks. "Whatever we can do to actually minimize the collection of personal data is good," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, one of three groups trying to organize a boycott of Intel's chips. The groups are concerned that the Government will require ever more invasive hardware modifications to keep track of individuals. Already they point to the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, which requires that telephone companies modify their network switches to make it easier for Government wiretappers. Also, the Federal Communications Commission is developing regulations that will require every cellular telephone to be able to report its precise location for "911" emergency calls. Privacy groups are worried that this feature will be used as a tracking technology by law enforcement officials. "The ultimate danger is that the Government will mandate that each chip have special logic added" to track identities in cyberspace, said Vernor Vinge, a computer scientist at San Diego State University. "We're on a slide in that direction." Vinge is the author of "True Names" (Tor Books, 1984), a widely cited science fiction novel in the early 1980's, that forecast a world in which anonymity in computer networks is illegal. Intel executives insist that their chip is being misconstrued by privacy groups. "We're going to start building security architecture into our chips, and this is the first step," said Pat Gelsinger, Intel vice president and general manager of desktop products. "The discouraging part of this is our objective is to accomplish privacy." That quandary -- that it is almost impossible to compartmentalize information for one purpose so that it cannot be misused -- lies at the heart of the argument. Moreover, providing security while at the same time offering anonymity has long been a technical and a political challenge. "We need to find ways to distinguish between security and identity," said James X. Dempsey, a privacy expert at the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington lobbying organization. So far the prospects are not encouraging. One technical solution developed by a cryptographer, David Chaum, made it possible for individuals to make electronic cash payments anonymously in a network. In the system Chaum designed, a user employs a different number with each organization, thereby insuring that there is no universal tracking capability. But while Chaum's solution has been widely considered ingenious, it has failed in the marketplace. Last year, his company, Digicash Inc., based in Palo Alto, Calif., filed for bankruptcy protection. "Privacy never seems to sell," said Bruce Schneier, a cryptographer and a computer industry consultant. "Those who are interested in privacy don't want to pay for it." Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company ----------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wouldn't it be rather interesting if someone developed a cross reference database -- open for public use -- of all those Intel serial numbers as they came into wide use. Any time a web site grabbed the number and associated it with some transaction or another, that latest transaction would be appended to the master database of all serial numbers/transactions. So then if you or I found someone's serial number we could go to this site where all the data was stored. Imagine: serial number 123456ABCDE98765FF ... and discover the person's name and address (from some site where he had purchased something by mail order); his sexual orientation based on web sites he frequented regularly; that he was employed in a sensitive position somewhere; the variety of data put in the file would be endless. It would be totally automated; as a website retrieved the data from a caller's computer it would just send it off at the same time to the database with the date, the name of the site visited, the nature or purpose of the site, etc. The master database would just locate that file and append the latest bit of information to the bottom of what was there already. Maintained by Big Brother, Inc (I wonder if anyone has ever copyrighted that phrase or incorporated under that name?) the database would be widely advertised and open free of charge to the public. Maintained with a grant from the Big Brother Foundation, its purpose would be to help everyone become a Big Brother to others on the net, and to help end once and for all the foolish notion that there is such a thing as individual privacy on the net. Each visitor to www.bigbrother.com would be handed a template to fill out on the serial number they were seeking information about, or to give a description of the kind of serial numbers they were seeking. Basically just a search engine, visitors would be encouraged to use bigbrother.com as their 'start page' and/or to add a little button on their site which would link to them. And not to worry that a visit to bigbrother.com would start a new, previously non-existent file on the visitor ... Big Brother never contributes to its own database; no one will ever know you were here to inquire about others unless of course *you* yourself happen to visit one of our cooperating web sites (only we know who those are) where a Big Brother trapdoor is waiting for you to fall through it. If you wish to be unlisted or removed from the database we can do that also; just $1.25 per month, the same price as telco charges for an unlisted number, and we give you the same administrative reasons for the monthly charge as telco would give you. Imagine, that's just fifteen dollars per year or a few cents per day to keep your daily visit to that naughty chat room or website from becoming public knowledge and if you request this non-pub feature of bigbrother.com now, we will give you the first two months of being unlisted for free, a $2.50 value. You no longer have to remember to carefully erase that \windows\temporary internet files directory each day and rid it of cookies; now your employer can simply log in to www.bigbrother.com and get the same information. And for those sites which do not cooperate with Big Brother in providing information about you, that's okay; when you visit a site which does cooperate, we will snatch your whole directory full of cookies anyway, and review them at our leisure before putting them in the database. Has anyone seriously considered starting a database like this, grabbing all the cookie files, etc they can find everywhere and putting them out for the public to view with ease? It certainly would change the looks of things around here wouldn't it. The net would become, as William Burroughs would have phrased it, a Naked Lunch, with everyone seeing what was on everyone else's plate. Do the old time readers here remember several years ago when I started 'Digital Detective' as an example of how it would work? I flushed Digital Detective down the toilet soon after I started it; I really did not have the stomach for it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 02:54:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Spotlight Put on Unix Design Flaw http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,1014039,00.html By Randy Barrett A newly discovered Unix design flaw threatens thousands of computers that operate on the Internet. The vulnerability opens Unix-based servers to a new kind of denial-of-service attack that overloads the servers' ability to answer incoming queries, according to security expert and Internet service provider Simson Garfinkel. Garfinkel's ISP, Vineyard.Net, experienced such an attack in early 1998, but Garfinkel soon realized the situation was an accident caused by a subscriber's faulty software. "The buggy software would finger our computer every minute, but it never hung up," Garfinkel said. By not terminating the connection, the program quickly loaded up his Unix server's process tables and brought the ISP to a standstill for 2 hours. "We didn't go looking for this. It hit us. It's not theoretical," Garfinkel said. The attack entails sending repeated open-connection requests to a Unix server. Subprograms -- like Internet Daemon, Secure Shell Daemon and Internet Message Access Protocol Daemon -- are written to automatically answer the connection and carry out requests. But if the connection is initiated with no request, most Daemons keep the line open, using resources from the server's process table, which can handle between 600 and 1,500 simultaneous tasks. Repeated connections eventually overload the process table and crash the server. Garfinkel publicly outlined the vulnerability -- which affects nearly all Unix-based platforms, including Irix, Linux and Solaris -- on a security newsgroup Feb. 19. This was after his repeated attempts to notify programmers at Berkeley Software Design Inc., Hewlett-Packard, Silicon Graphics Inc. and Sun Microsystems of the problem last year. None of the vendors gave it any notice, Garfinkel said. "It wasn't new enough to immediately gain attention. It's a design flaw, not a bug," said Gene Spafford, professor of computer science at Purdue University. Sabotage can come from outside Process table attacks are old news to Unix programmers, but Garfinkel discovered that the assault can come from the outside. Previously, developers only thought such sabotage could come from someone with internal access. AT&T Fellow Steven Bellovin said the vulnerability is real. "If I were running a popular server, I would at least try to add some resource limitation." Garfinkel said the servers most open to attack are those used for electronic mail, file serving and Web hosting. Protecting against it is relatively easy: Daemon programs can be rewritten to limit incoming connections or drop them after 30 seconds. "They need to have a governor installed," Garfinkel said. BSDI Director of Product Marketing Douglas Urner said the process table threat is hardly catastrophic. "In theory, there is a vulnerability here, which is like saying the gas in your car might explode." BSDI software safe Urner said the flaw probably wouldn't affect most BSDI software, because of existing safeguards. Silicon Graphics Inc. Principal Engineer Bill Earl said the threat exists but isn't a big deal, because the Daemons can be easily configured to limit incoming connections. Red Hat Software spokeswoman Melissa London wasn't familiar with the process table problem, but she said holes in Linux usually are solved quickly on public open source bulletin boards. "If there is any breach, we'll work to fix it," she said. A perceived lack of responsible vendor action to patch the problem is partly what spurred Garfinkel to make the attack known. "They don't do anything unless its publicly exposed," he said. "I can shut down any one of their servers on the Net." Hard to stay hidden But if he did, Garfinkel wouldn't be able to easily cloak his identity. Because the onslaught can take up to 10 hours to complete, Unix experts and vendors agree that maintaining stealth is nearly impossible. "It's an attack you're unlikely to see people get away with," Urner said. That fact doesn't assuage the fears of many Unix experts who take the vulnerability seriously as yet another sign that the Internet isn't robust enough to handle 21st century threats. "The real deeper problem is that the whole infrastructure is pretty rotten," said Peter Neumann, principal scientist at the Computer Science Lab at SRI International. --------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh gosh, is that the problem, that the whole infrastructure was built at a time when no one in their wildest imagination could have looked ahead 20-25 years and forseen the darker elements and uglier sides of the community they were building? Did they 'just assume' everyone ever likely to be part of the community would come from the same social mileau as themselves? I think they must have felt that way, particularly if you go back and review archived messages from the earliest days of Usenet; the way things were said and done, etc. If you think the Intel chip and serial number concept is causing a stink now, ask Peter Neumann or Gene Spafford or Vint Cerf what the reaction to it would have been in 1980-85. The lid would have blown off this place totally. Does anyone remember what one of the big controversies on the net was back in 1987? Should we or should we not allow commercial ISPs to interconnect with the internet at all? The first ISP to connect was a company in California called Portal Communications. Formerly a small, local BBS (bulletin board system), Portal made the big jump that year, and large segments of the net at the time were outraged at this invasion into previously sacred territory by non-university/scholarly people. How horrible it would be that your everyday, working Joe and Jane could just sign up, pay a couple dollars per month and be able to post messages in newsgroups. My god, the death of the net is imminent. Now we look back and say how quaint! Yes Peter, the whole infrastructure is rotten and in drastic need of replacement, just like the underground utility pipes and phone cables in many or most very large cities in the USA. Some of those pipes and wires are a century or more old, with little or no reliable maps as to where they are located underground. We find out about them when they break. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 5 Mar 1999 13:59:55 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > You know, it seems to me ethernet boards have had unique IDs for years > and years and years, but no privacy groups ever hollered about that. Quite correct. The difference is that on workstations, which have long used Ethernet IDs as serial numbers, you can control what software is running on your computer. Under Windows, you have a mystery mix of DLLs, OCXs, ActiveX, and who knows what else, installed and downloaded at random times, and it's not unreasonable to assume that some of that software will send your serial number back to headquarters if it's physically possible to do so. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ From: rtucker+from+199902@katan.ttgcitn.com (Ryan Tucker) Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: 5 Mar 1999 21:14:08 GMT Organization: TTGCITN Communications, Des Moines IA and Rochester NY Reply-To: rtucker+replyto+199902@katan.ttgcitn.com In , Thomas A. Horsley spewed: > You know, it seems to me ethernet boards have had unique IDs for years > and years and years, but no privacy groups ever hollered about that. The difference is that serial numbers are *required* for Ethernet to operate. Say my machine wants to say "howdy" to another box. It looks up the IP address (10.10.3.21), and then looks into a translation table to see what the ethernet hardware address of it is. Then, it sticks everything into a little ethernet packet and sends it into the ethernet with that destination address. On the other hand, CPU's have no legitimate need for serial numbers. The machine knows where the CPU is at all times (else the machine wouldn't be all that useful, would it?). I really can't think of a use for CPU serial numbers, convenient or technical or otherwise, that doesn't want to make me rename my news server "minitruth". The one use I can think of -- asset control for business machines -- could be served by a special line of CPU's, or just by etching a serial number onto the top of the CPU. BTW ... if this hasn't been mentioned already (not likely, since it's off topic ... well, about as far off as this discussion): http://www.defendyourprivacy.com/. Interesting that the implementation of this is the first of April -- just in time for tax refund season. I can see The Feds investigating sudden large deposits into people's accounts like crazy, and then eventually slipping and busting into the IRS's offices for drug trafficking ;-) -rt Ryan Tucker http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/ GSM/VM/Fax: +15157712865 Box 57083, Pleasant Hill IA 50317-0002 Need a mailing list hosted? Prices start at $0.00/mo www.ttgcitn.com Please keep public threads public -- e-mail responses will be ignored. ------------------------------ From: David W. Pfister Subject: Re: E911 Illinois Requirements Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 02:33:24 GMT Organization: Optimum Online From the ICC site (http://icc.state.il.us/icc/Telecom/911/0219_leg.htm) Senate Bill 930 amends the Emergency Telephone Systems Act [50 ILCS Act 750] Section 15.6. The amendment which extends the compliance date for private business switches from June 30, 1999 to June 30, 2000 has not yet been signed by the Governor. Senate Bill 930 has passed the Legislature and is currently before the Governor, pending signature. Wrong Number wrote in message ... > Help !!! > Just found out about an Ill law, passed in 1994 which gives Business's > untill June 1999 to have exact station location information show up on > 911 calls. ------------------------------ From: Tony Zafiropoulos Subject: Re: E911 Illinois Requirements Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:47:56 -0600 Allan M. Olbur sent me this info on E911 ... Hope it helps. Regards, Tony Zafiropoulos Ph: (314) 878-9855 14377 Woodlake Dr, Ste 311 Fax: (314) 878-9893 Chesterfield, MO 63017 Pager:(314) 424-2545 http://www.ctitek.com mailto:tonyz@ctitek.com Feel the Power of Computer Telephony ---- forwarded message ---- Y2K pales in comparison to the task of maintaining current electronic records required to pinpoint the origin of an E-911 telephone call ... see attached. Regards, Allan M. Olbur InfraTech Inc. 847-229-0115 www.infratechinc.com Emergency Telephone System Act Amendment State of Illinois House Bill 2515 Sponsor: Representative Winkle State of Illinois Public Act 89-497 Enacted by the General Assembly Of the People of the State of Illinois June 27th, 1996 By the Honorable Senator Stan Weaver (50 ILCS 750/15.6) Sec. 15.6. Private business switch service 9-1-1- service. (a) After June 30, 1996, an entity that installs or operates a new private business switch service or replaces an existing private business switch service and provides telecommunications facilities or services to businesses shall provide to those business end users the same level of 9-1-1 service as the public agency and the telecommunications carrier are providing to other business end users of the local 9-1-1 system. This service shall include, but not be limited to, the capability to identify the telephone number, extension number, and the physical location that is the source of the call to the number designated as the emergency telephone number. After June 30, 1999, all entities providing or operating a private business switch service shall be in compliance with this Section. (b) the private business switch operator is responsible for forwarding end user automatic location identification record information to the 9-1-1 system provider according to the format, frequency, and procedures established by that system provider. (c) This Act does not apply to any PBX telephone extension that uses radio transmissions to convey electrical signals directly between the telephone extension and the serving PBX. (d) An entity that violates this Section is guilty of a business offense and shall be fined not less that $1,000 and not more than $5,000. (e) Nothing in this Section shall be construed to preclude the Attorney General on behalf of the Commission or on his or her own initiative, or any other interested person, from seeking judicial relief, by mandamus, injunction, or otherwise, to compel compliance with this Section. (Source: P.A. 88-604, eff. 9-1-94; 89-222, eff. 1-1-96.) ------------------------------ From: ahk@trainman.chinet.com (Allan H. Kerman) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:45:39 -0600 Subject: Re: German Hotel Phone Rates (Sheraton is Not the Only Offender) Organization: chinet In article , John R. Covert wrote: [complaint to president of Sheraton hotels concerning price gouging on local telephone calls] > I expect to stay in the Frankfurt Sheraton two more times this year, > and I hope that I will find more reasonable telephone rates on my > future visits. Your expectations are ridiculous. You have told them that despite the ill treatment you received at their hands you will still stay there. Do you want to affect the market? Start behaving like an educated consumer. Take your business elsewhere. ------------------------------ From: Clifton T. Sharp Jr. Reply-To: clifto@megsinet.net Organization: as little as possible Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Russians Bomb Sanford's Company Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 14:15:44 -0600 jeichl - John Eichler wrote: > There is a cute cartoon strip on the web that you might enjoy. > Recently (this week) they have had a story line of the Russians trying > to nuke the headquarters of Sanford Wallace's new company. (see Feb > 23rd) It's a great SPAM story. > http://www.userfriendly.org/cartoons/archives/99feb/19990223.html Start from instead. Whose picture is that on the wall? :-) Cliff Sharp | All relevant people are pertinent. | WA9PDM | All rude people are impertinent. | | Therefore, no rude people are relevant. | | --Solomon W. Golomb | ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #30 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 5 19:41:38 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA19861; Fri, 5 Mar 1999 19:41:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 19:41:38 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903060041.TAA19861@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #31 TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Mar 99 19:41:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 31 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Scientists Cut Their Mobile Phone Use (Monty Solomon) House Bill Protects Cell Phone Privacy (Monty Solomon) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Donald Seeley) Re: Pentium III-only Websites Coming (John R. Levine) Re: A Growing Compatibility Issue: Computers and Privacy (Barry Margolin) Information Wanted on Telefonica (Jeff Camp) Re: Caller Pays and Code Calling (Mike Fox) Re: Caller Pays and Code Calling (Joe Harrison) Re: Ring in the Values: Old Phones Are Major Collectibles (Shalom Septimus) Re: Old" Telephones and "Old Time" Radio (Daryl R. Gibson) Administrivia: Digest Subscriptions (TELECOM Digest Editor) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Scientists cut their mobile phone use Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 16:28:18 -0500 http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_288000/288245.stm Researchers have tested the impact of microwaves on brain function Leading scientists have have cut down or modified their personal use of mobile phones as fears mount that they can damage health. New research to be published next month links mobile phone use to memory loss. The BBC's Fergus Walsh reports on the "first British research of its kind" The use of mobile phones has already been linked to headaches, fatigue, damage to the immune system and cancer. However, there is no firm evidence yet that mobile phones cause any harm. Professor Colin Blakemore, Waynflete professor of physiology at Oxford University and a member of the official body that regulates the use of mobile phones in the UK, is one of those who have cut back their use of mobile phones. Professor Blakemore said there was growing evidence that mobile phones could affect the functioning of the brain. He said there are other reasons not to use mobile phones, such as cost and annoyance to other people. Professor Blakemore said nerve cells were influenced by electromagnetic radiation of the type produced by mobile phones. He said the phones were also placed close to areas in the brain that regulated short-term memory, as well as areas that controlled heart function and blood pressure. He told News Online: "It would not surprise me if there was a small temporary effect on the electrical response of nerve cells when the phone is in use which could impact on the brain's ability to process information." Professor Blakemore said he had experienced problems concentrating while using mobile phones. "I have experienced by attention being distracted rather more than it should have been just by the conversation I was having," he said. However, Professor Blakemore said the effect of mobile phones was likely only to be temporary, and relatively small. He said reports that suggested mobile phones could cause permanent damage should be treated with great caution. Professor Jim Penman, from Aberdeen University, is another top academic who has changed the way he uses mobile phones. He said he was using an earpiece attached to his mobile phone so that the handset was kept as far away from his brain as possible. "I believe there is a significant risk to using mobile phones, and it seems prudent to minimise that risk if it can be done easily," he said. Professor Penman said it was not yet clear whether the effects of radiation from mobile phones would be short term or long-term. A team from Bristol Royal Infirmary has carried out research into a link between mobile phones and memory loss. The research, to be published next month in the International Journal of Radiation Biology, is thought to show that mobile phone use has a most impact on short-term memory and may also reduce blood pressure. Volunteers were exposed to microwaves similar to those emitted by a mobile phone for 30 minutes, and asked to undertake test of brain function. The researchers, led by Dr Alan Preece, have refused to comment on their findings, and claim national press reports about their work are riddled with inaccuracies. The mobile phone industry tried to allay fears that using its products could pose a risk to people's health. Tom Wills-Sandford, a director of the Federation of the Electronics Industry, an umbrella group for the industry, urged the public not to panic, and said there was no concrete basis for any fears about health risks. He said: "I would say it is important to look at the totality of the scientific research which shows there is no substantive evidence that there is a link between mobile phones and adverse effects on people's health. "It would be impossible to comment on the new research because it has not yet been published, but I would be delighted to do so after April 8." He added: "We are very concerned if our customers are concerned, and we take this issue very seriously, but we don't think there is anything to panic about." The National Radiological Protection Board said the international consensus was that there was "no demonstrable evidence of a health risk" from mobile phones. It added that there was a need for "good research" into the health impact of using the phones and said that, if research showed a danger, it would review its position. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: House Bill Protects Cell Phone Privacy Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 10:39:09 -0500 The Netly News FROM FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1999 Think of it as part of the Gingrich legacy. In December 1996, a Florida couple tapped and taped a cell phone conversation between former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and a colleague, then passed the recording on to the New York Times. Yesterday, a 403-3 vote in the House of Representatives made it illegal to eavesdrop on and/or disclose cell phone conversations, or any other form of wireless communication, for that matter. The penalty? A $2,000 fine, or six months in jail, or both. Technically, cell phone calls are very easy to intercept -- you can do it using consumer technology currently available on the open market, although the new bill makes that technology illegal, too. Now all the House has to do is get the Senate to agree. A similar bill was passed last year, but the Senate never voted on it. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Excuse me, but why are we dumping one new law on top of old ones that suffice quite well? It seems to me the Communications Act of 1934 as amended already states that one may not repeat or acknowledge overhearing any radio transmission which is not intended for the listener (as for example a commercial broadcast would be). Certainly one may not legally benefit from what one hears that way in a radio transmission, and I would think the sale of a transcript or recording of a cellular phone call would count as a benefit. Why do we need a new law just to cover cell phones when -- if there is some doubt as to the applicability of the existing law -- it could simply be amended with appropriate definitions, etc. And 'benefit' can be defined in many ways beyond merely cash passing from one person to another. If I overhear on a police scanner that the cops are on the way to arrest you and I call you on the phone immediatly and tell you that you had better split in a hurry then both of us have benefitted via a radio transmission not intended for us; you by your continued freedom after fleeing before the police arrive, and me via perhaps the vicarious thrill I had in informing you of what I heard. No more laws needed! Eliminate a large majority of the ones we have now and properly enforce the remaining ones. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Donald Seeley Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: 5 Mar 1999 20:16:54 GMT Organization: EnterAct, L.L.C. John Nagle wrote: > Apple is about to get hit on this. It turns out that Apple has > apparently been recording iMac serial numbers on an unused sector > of the hard drive. Look over in "comp.sys.mac.programming" for details. > It's worse than the Intel problem; Apple puts the same serial number > barcoded on the carton and on the hard drive, so the serial number > that identifies the machine when sold is the same one it has stored > internally. Now that's consumer control. This sounds like a VIN: stamped on the engine, body and frame. I'm not saying I drive beaters, but thinking back, every computer I've owned has been worth more than the car I was driving. From a consumer protection viewpoint, it could be argued that a processor ID would be quite a deterrent to theft of hardware. Sure, you could swap out the chip, but that would certainly reduce the profit margin on your ill gotten gains. Finally, considering the success of "preferred customer" cards, the linking of purchase patterns with unique personal information does not seem to be as frightening to most people as it is to some. [not that *I* would use one...] I'm not saying I'm for it, and I'm not saying I'm against it. I just think that Rubicon has already been crossed many times over. Don Seeley Daring Designs Typography - Graphics - Layout http://www.daringdesigns.com/~dschi/ dschi@daringdesigns.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What I do when I go to the grocery store and the cashier at the checkout asks me if I have a 'preferred customer card' I always say I forgot to bring it with me and ask if I can use hers/his. Invariably they say yes, and I get the discounts associated without the hassle of adding more stuff to whatever dossiers are being collected on me. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 5 Mar 1999 15:34:14 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Pentium III-only Websites Coming Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Folks, this is a bad, bad, BAD idea. It's the thin edge of the wedge, > but we could end up seeing the Internet carved up into proprietary > ghettos designed to serve selfish corporate commercial interests -- the > road to the sort of Big-Brotherdom that the anti-trust lawyers have > accused Microsoft of. Indeed M$ has dabbled in the idea of promoting > Websites that can only be accessed properly with Internet Explorer. Dabbled? Try visiting windowsupdate.msn.com or any of a zillion other Microsoft sites from Netscape or Opera. It's even worse when you're not running on Windows -- a lot of sites just won't talk to me if I don't install Shockwave or some local crudware for the site. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well John, what are you doing on those sites anyway?`I mean, of what possible value could they have for your work or personal interests? It is none of my business what you are there for, but who could even care if they want to talk to you or not? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: A Growing Compatibility Issue: Computers and Privacy Organization: GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 22:09:45 GMT In article , Monty Solomon wrote: > http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/03/biztech/articles/03privacy.html > Far from scaling back its vision, however, Intel said it was planning an > even wider range of features in its chips to help companies protect > copyrighted materials. It also pointed to software applications that > would use the embedded number to identify participants in electronic > chat rooms on the Internet and thereby, for example, protect children > from Internet stalkers. These claims about the capabilities of the CPU ID get more outlandish every day! While I admit that there are plenty of homes where the kids have their own PC's, I suspect the majority share a single PC for the whole family. So if the parents and the children both use the same PC, which participant does the CPU ID identify? How does it keep the children out of the chat rooms while allowing the parents in? Barry Margolin, barmar@bbnplanet.com GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA *** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups. Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Barry, the point is if someone is victimized by an 'internet stalker' -- child or adult -- why would anyone else in the household want anything other than to identify the person for the purposes of isolating themselves from him? Obviously the serial number can't be used to identify *which* member of some household is involved, i.e. a minor on an adult web site versus mom or dad or grandmother using the same web site but if a parent says to a web site operator 'never allow my children to login' the web site has at least a better chance of complying with a parent's wish. Instead of running those flaky and unreliable filters on public library computers which always seem to let the inoffensive stuff get excluded while the stuff they do not want available manages to slip through the web site could be requested, 'please do not ever admit serial to your pages. On any computer you operate under whatever DNS may apply, do not pass information under any circumstances to serial .' A perfect solution? Of course not, but just one more way for people to control their own use of the net and their children. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jcamp2@home.com (Jeff Camp) Subject: Information Wanted on Telefonica Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 05:12:28 GMT Organization: @Home Network Has anyone here ever dealt with Telefonica in Spain? Our company is considering them for a project but I can't seem to find anyone who currently uses them. Thanks, Jeff jcamp2@home.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 11:54:35 -0500 From: Mike Fox Organization: not organized! Subject: Re: Caller Pays and Code Calling David Chessler wrote: > From what I know > of European telephone tariffs, most or all calls from land-line phones > are charged, usually at relatively high, timed rates. Thus, Europeans > make calls in the expectation that they will be charged for them. This > is not generally the case in this country; there are few places where > local calls are timed (New York City is an obvious exception). Thus, > resistance may be higher than advocates of "caller pays" realize. I agree with this statement wholeheartedly, and I always remember it when Europeans berate Americans on newsgroups for not adopting their paradigm. I often mention this in newsgroup arguments about caller pays. Europeans and many other non-US phone users are simply used to paying every time they dial a phone, even if the call is strictly landline and next door. Americans are not, and will resist. It's that simple. I believe caller pays should be available, for example for consultants who would bill their expenses to the customer (caller) anyway, but I seriously doubt this would ever widely catch on in the U.S. Mike ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 13:26:50 +0000 From: /DD.common=Joe/I=J/G=Joe/S=Harrison/@bra0130.wins.icl.co.uk (J Harrison) Subject: Re: Caller Pays and Code Calling David Chessler: > The growing expectation on the part of the public that the price of a > telephone call be nearly free, and essentially flat-rate, is further > nurtured by another trend: the flat rates most people pay for internet > access -- access that may, even now, include the capability to provide > voice communications in competition with telephone. Ironically, here in the UK where local calls are almost all (expensively) metered the "flat rate" that most people pay to their ISP for internet access is zero. During the last year the growth of the "free ISP" has been astonishing, in fact the traditional "pay" ISPs have been under tremendous pressure to follow suit and announce they are now free and many have already done so. These newcomers are normal recognisable full-function ISPs, there is no penalty to the user in terms of forcible delivery of ads in a browser window or whatever. How do they get their revenue? The browser manufacturers' deployment kits are used to the full in order to hand out heavily customised browser versions, so lots of eyeballs visit the ISP's portal since it is the default home page. More importantly, they are able to come to suitable arrangements with telco because of the call volume they generate. Joe ------------------------------ From: druggist@erols.com (Shalom Septimus) Subject: Re: Ring in the Values: Old Phones Are Major Collectibles Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 17:59:47 GMT On 23 Feb 1999 23:23:34 GMT, lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) wrote: > A component of audio quality for candlestick and 200 style phones is > if they're hooked up with a good "network" and anti-sidetone circuit. > Without one they sound lousy. The 300 series and later phones > had the network and ringer box built into the base of the unit. Don't forget to add the thyristor to the earpiece circuit, or else that loose-diaphragm transducer that those E1 handsets came with will blow your eardrum off should you happen to press the switch-hook while the handset is pressed to your ear ... ouch. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 16:51:40 -0700 From: Daryl R. Gibson Subject: Re: "Old" Telephones and "Old Time" Radio > And IMO, the acoustic quality when VACUUM TUBES are used over transistors > or integrated circuits, is FAR superior! I imagine Mark was referring to the recording devices here, but I also have noted that AM Radio signal quality went downhill dramatically when transmitters were changed from the old Vacuum Tubes. An example in point is clear-channel radio station KSL in Salt Lake City; I live some 50 miles away from SLC, but when KSL changed to a "new" transmitter, their signal went south (so to speak). An associate of mine, who used to work at an AM station in Idaho Falls, also notes that when the station went to their "backup" transmitter, tubes and all, they got DSL requests from all over the U.S. When they were on the "new" transmitter, the DSL requests were minimized, as was their signal. Nowadays at night, I tend to listen to KNX Los Angeles when I'm driving in Utah. It comes in a whole lot better than KSL. They also have old radio shows each night at 9 p.m. Pacific. I'm getting used to listening to Gunsmoke on Friday nights....I wonder if KNX has an older transmitter? Daryl "As you ramble through life, brother, no matter what your goal, keep your eye upon the doughnut, and not upon the hole" --Dr. Murray Banks, quoting a menu ------------------------------ From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Administrivia: Digest Subscriptions Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 18:00:00 EST For those readers who have not responded in recent months, may I take a minute of your time with this 'message from the sponsor' and remind you that in general, my financial support comes from the presentation of this Digest for your information, enjoyment and whatever. Although there is no set fee to participate, and I am very grateful for the support I receive from ITU, LCS/MIT and the advertisers, I still am in need of support from those readers via the email Digest and the web page http://telecom-digest.org/TELECOM_Digest_Online ... and many years ago established a suggested annual donation of twenty dollars to offset the time I spend on this effort. No one is ever added to or deleted from the mailing list as a result of their financial contri- bution or lack thereof, nor is any editorial consideration ever given for the same reasons. I no longer have my two cats to care for; they have both been gone for a few years now but some personal friends have noted that I have become much to big for my britches (well, some netters have known that all along), and that I should go down to the Salvation Army second hand store and try to find a new pair or two. Even the price of the Value Meals I get at McD's has gone up and cigarettes now cost me three dollars per pack. :( Since people make contributions to 'adopt' poor children in other countries and to 'adopt' animals at the local zoo I suppose there is nothing wrong in suggesting that you can adopt a moderator if you wish to do so. I am no longer involved in the operation of the bus station in Skokie; it was impossible to do that and this at the same time and as readers know, last year you hardly got anything out of me where this Digest is concerned. I'd like to do better for the net this year. I sold a little piece of writing to the {Christian Science Monitor} a few months ago -- even they don't pay as well as they used to years ago, and it was not telecom-related so I won't even discuss it further -- and now that money is gone also. Please do whatever you feel is appropriate, with my thanks for helping the Digest continue to be published for now nearly eighteen years. Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest, Box 4621, Skokie, IL 60076-4621. Thank you. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #31 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Sun Mar 7 19:36:12 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA27688; Sun, 7 Mar 1999 19:36:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1999 19:36:12 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903080036.TAA27688@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #32 TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Mar 99 19:36:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 32 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel (Brad Ackerman) Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel (Samuel Hall) Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel (Ryan Shook) Re: Pentium III-only Websites Coming (Seymour Dupa) Re: Pentium III-only Websites Coming (Time to Post) Re: Pentium III-only Websites Coming (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: History Wanted on 999 System (David Chessler) Re: German Hotel Phone Rates (Sheraton Not Only Offender) (John R.Covert) "310-555-2368" (Joseph Singer) Re: Net-Way Phone Number (Ryan Shook) A Failing Memory is the First Sign of ... I Forget (Bill Levant) Re: Spotlight Put on Unix Design Flaw (Garrett Wollman) Re: "Old" Telephones and "Old Time" Radio (L.Winson) Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime (Clifton T. Sharp) Re: A Growing Compatibility Issue: Computers and Privacy (Bill Newkirk) Re: House Bill Protects Cell Phone Privacy (Bill Newkirk) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: bsa3@cornell.edu (Brad Ackerman) Subject: Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: 07 Mar 1999 17:19:54 -0500 Organization: NERV GeoFront, Tokyo III Steve Cogorno writes: > Here's what I think is the *real* reason people do not want PSNs to be > available. This would allow software companies to license software to > one and only one CPU. No more pirating software. That's what I think > this is about - not some internet privacy hogwash. Is there any reason for a PSN copy-protection scheme to be more secure than a dongle? There isn't a single copy protection scheme that hasn't been cracked, whether it's based on serial numbers, dongles, or fiddling around with the floppy disk controller. Copy protection schemes do nothing to prevent wArEz d00dZ from pirating software, and they are a considerable incovenience to users. PSNs used in this manner are no different. Brad Ackerman N1MNB "...faced with the men and women who bring home bsa3@cornell.edu the pork, voters almost always re-elect them." http://skaro.pair.com/ -- _The Economist_, 31 Oct 1998 ------------------------------ From: samhall@dkdavis.com (Samuel Hall) Subject: Re: Chip IP Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 21:16:29 GMT Organization: Davis & Associates On 3 Mar 1999 21:18:06 GMT, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in respnse to ranck@joesbar.cc.vt.edu: > Caller-id has cut back tremendously on the malicious use of the phone > as a way to hide. Before caller-id, large cities like Chicago had > literally *hundreds* of malicious false alarms called in to the > fire and police departments daily, just so the caller could watch > the firemen and policemen rush off in good faith to save a life that > did not exist or put out a fire which did not occur. Unlike caller-id > which, when it was established in each community *immediatly* gave > emergency authorities instant reference to the caller's name and > address, this new chip we are hearing about won't tell us where a > net-offender lives or his name, unless s/he has already chosen to > make it available. No one here knows who went home today with a new > computer they bought with the new chip in it. What we will be able > to do is look at the caller to our website or chatroom or bulletin > board system, etc and *regardless of the latest screen name or bogus > email address the person uses* tell that person he is honored and > welcome at our site, or that he is to stay away. Not true. Enhanced 911 service provides caller name, address and other data via a seperate data circuit. It is not based on Caller-ID and was offered many years before Caller-ID was developed. What I want to know is how they plan to deal with people like me that use different machines? For example, I do my banking on my office machine, my home machine and my laptop. > Let's hope spammers all go out and buy new computers today! > When they do, watch for mail filters to be developed which demand > the serial number information in the process of sorting mail. Then > instead of madly adding one site name after another to our filters, > trying to find out what IP number space they use, etc, we simply take > the one that that will never change regardless of how many ISPs give > them the boot -- the little number on the chip. PAT] Very easy to change the number transmitted with each e-mail message. Senior System Engineer Davis & Associates 972.234.5422 ------------------------------ From: Ryan Shook Subject: Re: Chip ID Number Continues to Plague Intel Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 21:36:32 -0500 Organization: University of Waterloo On 5 Mar 1999, Ryan Tucker wrote: > In , Thomas A. Horsley > spewed: >> You know, it seems to me ethernet boards have had unique IDs for years >> and years and years, but no privacy groups ever hollered about that. > The difference is that serial numbers are *required* for Ethernet to > operate. > Say my machine wants to say "howdy" to another box. It looks up the IP > address (10.10.3.21), and then looks into a translation table to see what > the ethernet hardware address of it is. Then, it sticks everything into > a little ethernet packet and sends it into the ethernet with that > destination address. I'm not sure, but I think Tom was probably referring to the MAC address with is a longer number and is permanently set by the manufacturere (I think) as opposed to your IP address which you can change quite easily. The saving grace of MAC addresses is that they are not widely used. Ryan Ryan Shook Mechanical Engineering | RJShook@uwaterloo.ca Amateur (HAM) Radio Lic.:VE3 TKD | www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/u/rjshook E-Commerce: E-Caveat Emptor ------------------------------ From: Seymour Dupa Subject: Re: Pentium III-only Websites Coming Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc. Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 01:06:22 GMT My problem -- someone will come up with a TSR that will intercept the request and generate a number. John Monty Solomon wrote: > In the future, these Web sites will probe the computer trying to access > the site and use the chip's Processor Serial Number (PSN) to determine > if it is a Pentium III. ------------------------------ From: Time to Post Subject: Re: Pentium III-only Websites Coming Organization: KRAY Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 18:32:54 GMT John R. Levine wrote: >> Folks, this is a bad, bad, BAD idea. It's the thin edge of the wedge, >> but we could end up seeing the Internet carved up into proprietary >> ghettos designed to serve selfish corporate commercial interests -- the >> road to the sort of Big-Brotherdom that the anti-trust lawyers have >> accused Microsoft of. Indeed M$ has dabbled in the idea of promoting >> Websites that can only be accessed properly with Internet Explorer. > Dabbled? Try visiting windowsupdate.msn.com or any of a zillion other > Microsoft sites from Netscape or Opera. It's even worse when you're > not running on Windows -- a lot of sites just won't talk to me if I > don't install Shockwave or some local crudware for the site. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well John, what are you doing on those > sites anyway?`I mean, of what possible value could they have for your > work or personal interests? It is none of my business what you are > there for, but who could even care if they want to talk to you or not? PAT] How about the fact that I maintain 30+ computers. Some laptops, some desktops, some with 95, others with 98. I personally use UNIX and NetScape but have a need to get into Microshit web sites to get the latest drivers for this or that as they can't seem to write software right the first time. I care if they want to talk to me or not regardless of the software I choose to use (which *NEVER* crashes) considering the fact that I've spent some serious $$$ on licensing. Realize this and quickly before it is too late: MICROSOFT SUCKS This address is for outgoing posts only. Please do not reply to this address via email as it will never be seen. If you have something to share please post it here for everyone to see. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Pentium III-only Websites Coming Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 13:31:13 GMT I don't understand how this will work. The website doesn't get to talk to the CPU, only to the web browser. Current web-browsers, of course, don't transmit the P-III ID, but even if future ones do, what's to prevent me from adding a module to lynx that emulates a P-III ID? There was a thread here a little while ago about the new P-III advertisements, which claim you'll get to surf the web better with the P-III, and so I understand why Intel is trying to do this (and, in fact, suppose a web site were set up offering 10% off airline tickets, but you could only get it with the P-III. That might boost P-III sales ...) But I don't see how this scheme has a chance of working technically. Joel (joel@exc.com) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: History Wanted on 999 System From: david.chessler@mix.cpcug.org (David Chessler) Date: Sat, 06 Mar 99 14:23:00 -0500 Organization: Capital PC User Group's MIX BBS Reply-To: david.chessler@mix.cpcug.org > A friend of mine is doing a project on the emergency services, and > she is looking for the history of the 999 system. Can you kind folk > help in anyway, please. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For those not familiar with it, '999' > is the equivilent in the UK (and other European countries?) to '911' > in the United States. I do not know if anyone has done a > comprehensive history write up on either. Answers from anyone? PAT] If memory serves, about three or four years ago TELECOM Digest had a several messages about the development of an international standard in Europe for "999" ("911") services; the key number was different in every country. Many countries changed to a common number. The US and Canada obviously didn't, and neither did the UK apparently. ___ __ chessler@capaccess.org chessler@usa.net (permanent address) d_)--/d chessler@mix.cpcug.org ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1999 07:58:33 -0500 From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: German Hotel Phone Rates (Sheraton is Not the Only Offender) ahk@trainman.chinet.com (Allan H. Kerman) replied to my original message saying: > Your expectations are ridiculous. You have told them that despite the > ill treatment you received at their hands you will still stay there. > Do you want to affect the market? Start behaving like an educated consumer. > Take your business elsewhere. Please note the subject of the message: "Sheraton is Not the Only Offender". I have yet to find a hotel in Germany that lowered the per-unit price charged to customers when Telekom dropped the price (and increased the charge rate). In fact, it seems that hotel telephone charges are simply getting higher at all hotels throughout Germany. Sometimes I don't choose my hotel; many of my trips to Germany are to business meetings held in the hotel. On my last trip, a Holiday Inn was the meeting hotel, and their rates were just as high. Back in the U.S., Holiday Inn customer service refunded half the charges, but I suspect nothing was done to change the rates charged by the hotel. Next year I expect to return to that hotel. Next month I'll be staying in a Hilton. Again, not my choice of hotels. I expect the rates to be just as high, and I'll be writing a similar letter to Hilton when I get back. I'm probably wasting my time even writing. If you can find a first-class hotel in Germany that charges less than four times the actual cost of a local phone call, please tell me about it. john [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Outrageous telephone surcharges in hotels is a relatively new thing; maybe dating back at most ten to fifteen years ago. Prior to the early/middle 1980's here in the USA -- when AT&T was running things -- telcos and hotels had an understanding that went like this: so that telco could avoid the necessity of establishing service and accounts for every transient passing through town enabling them convenient use of the phone during their stay, the hotel switchboard would function like an agent for telco, both billing and collecting what was due. In return for serving telco's temporary and transient customers in this way, telco provided a *commission* to the hotel, typically in the 10-15 percent range. The hotel was required to guarentee payment with one excep- tion. To facilitate billing and collection, telco would immediatly on the conclusion of the call notify the hotel switchboard of 'time and charges' so that the charge could be immediatly posted to the guest ledger. The one exception to the hotel's guarentee of payment to telco was if telco failed to quote time and charges in a timely way, which sometimes happened, and the guest checked out of the hotel (hopefully settling his account before leaving!) without the hotel knowing about that final phone call. Normally the hotel switchboard had a few special trunks on it which went directly to the long distance operator. All that was necessary for the hotel operator to do was (when a guest asked for a long distance number) was plug the associated cord into one of the trunks dedicated and wait for a response from the operator. Telco operator already knew it was the Hilton Hotel from the way it came up on her board. The hotel operator would say "Room XXXX here, I am " ... then copy the call details down at the same time as the guest was telling telco operator what he wanted. If the call was administrative to the hotel, the switchboard was NOT supposed to use those special circuits or trunks, since only GUEST room calls were commissionable, not the hotel's own business calls. Depending on the amount of traffic, time and charge callbacks either occurred at the end of each call, or sometimes every ten or fifteen minutes the calls would be 'batched' and one person at telco would call back several at a time. The biggest establishments such as Hilton usually had a teletype machine on a tie-line direct to the telco central office, with time/charges coming back that way. As proof at a later time that charges were called back, the hotel switchboard would provide the serial number from their toll ticket. When telco operator called back with charges for (let's say) the dozen calls which had gone out in the past fifteen minutes, she did not expect to wait for you, either. Typically she would call in, and give a dozen quotes in a minute or less, talking at the speed of an auctioneer in the middle of a frantic bid, pausing only at the end of each quote to say "I am , you are ?" Additional surcharges added by the hotel or other 'commissionable subscriber acting as agent' were strongly discouraged in all cases and usually flatly forbidden. AT&T insisted that 'hotel guest subscribers' should not be discriminated against in any way with additional charges. Of course AT&T also insisted that switchboard operators for any hotel or large institution i.e. university had to take the mandatory training classes for operators offered by Ma Bell before the person could be 'certified' as an operator. I think they dropped that requirement sometime in the 1950's. Now-days, hotels seem to feel that every square foot of floor space on the property has to be a profit center for them. I am surprised they do not charge guests to ride the elevator. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 12:00:30 -0800 From: Joseph Singer Subject: "310-555-2368" Pat wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not certain what you mean by your > term 'net-way' ... but I can tell you I do not think I would care to > have such a phone number, at least not with charges being paid for > with my money. There are too many people getting '1212' confused with > '1234' when they dial toll-free directory assistance, and there are > many people who would use an example such as his number when they > write out a presumably 'ficticious' number for illustration purposes. > I wonder if anyone anywhere has ever been assigned '310-555-2368', the > number which for many years appeared in the front pages of phone > directories as an example of long distance direct dialing? PAT] Actually, if you'll take a look at Bell System ads the number was: Area Code 311 555-2368 and before ANC it was MAin 0-2368 Us savvy telecom people know that 311 can only be used as a service code such as 411 for directory, 611 for repair, 911 for emergencies, etc. Joseph Singer Seattle, Washington USA [ICQ pgr] +1 206 405 2052 [msg] PO Box 23135 Seattle WA 98102-0435 USA ------------------------------ From: Ryan Shook Subject: Re: Net-Way Phone Number Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1999 11:34:32 -0500 Organization: University of Waterloo On Fri, 5 Mar 1999, Marvin E. Kurtti wrote: > This morning on CNN I saw an ad from a stock broker that showed their > phone number as 800.555.1234. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not certain what you mean by your > term 'net-way' ... but I can tell you I do not think I would care to I think what Marvin meant is that the number was shown as 800.555.1234 as opposed to 800-555-1234. The number shown was probably not the number in this message. Net-Way I assume refers to how IP addresses are usually written. 255.255.255.255 Cheers! Ryan Ryan Shook Mechanical Engineering | RJShook@uwaterloo.ca Amateur (HAM) Radio Lic.:VE3 TKD | www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/u/rjshook E-Commerce: E-Caveat Emptor ------------------------------ From: Wlevant@aol.com Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 21:36:08 EST Subject: A Failing Memory is the First Sign of ... I Forget ... > I wonder if anyone anywhere has ever been assigned '310-555-2368', the > number which for many years appeared in the front pages of phone > directories as an example of long distance direct dialing? PAT] Well, maybe, *if* they assign 555 to real customers anywhere. The number you're thinking of, though, was 311-555-2368. **THAT** one hasn't been assigned to anyone anywhere (and if you dial it by mistake in Baltimore, you get the cops). Bill ------------------------------ From: wollman@lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: Spotlight Put on Unix Design Flaw Date: 6 Mar 1999 04:13:53 GMT Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science In article , Monty Solomon quoted some copyrighted trade rag article which said in part: > That fact doesn't assuage the fears of many Unix experts who take the > vulnerability seriously as yet another sign that the Internet isn't > robust enough to handle 21st century threats. Then again, many Unix experts understand that the vulnerability ISN'T serious. In reasonable values of `Unix', it is a fairly trivial matter to restrict users (including remote users) from sucking up all available processes, and most servers written for high performance (e.g., the Apache Web server) are designed to serve many people without requiring many processes. The fact that there aren't enough competent system administrators out there is not a Unix problem, it's an education problem. The fact that Garfinkel's machine could be crashed by an unprivileged user (`nobody', the identity `fingerd' runs under) is entirely his own fault, or that of people he employed. (I would note that Garfinkel was one of the editors of 1994's ``The UNIX-hater's Handbook''.) Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same wollman@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick ------------------------------ From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (L. Winson) Subject: Re: "Old" Telephones and "Old Time" Radio Date: 7 Mar 1999 03:10:41 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS > I imagine Mark was referring to the recording devices here, but I also > have noted that AM Radio signal quality went downhill dramatically > when transmitters were changed from the old Vacuum Tubes. When a major Phila AM radio station changed ownership, they reported on improvements they intended for the transmitter system. According to the newspaper (which I don't know if were technically accurate!), AM radio towers required a lot of support antenna wires which were lost over time. This degraded signal quality. If this is true, it wouldn't surprise me. Most AM radio today is either low budget community stations, news, sports, or talk radio, where the high quality of music and national network entertainment isn't quite as critical. A friend of mine collects old radios. I was amazed at the quality of an early FM reciver. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 15:10:44 -0600 From: Clifton T. Sharp Jr. Subject: Re: Virginia Law Would Make Internet Spamming a Crime Organization: as little as possible John David Galt wrote: > Quoth Eric Bohlman: >> Let's take a non-commercial example here: the mailings of a political >> campaign. [snip] >> But with e-mail, sending out a million promotional e-mails costs me >> no more than sending out ten. Therefore, if I were to send out >> unsolicited campaign e-mails, I would have *no economic incentive* >> to go through my mailing list and exclude addresses for people >> outside the 13th ward. Doing so would cost me time and money. It >> would be easier and cheaper for me to shotgun-blast my campaign >> message all over the world. The fact that 10,000 of the messages >> land in Seattle doesn't matter to me. > I would love to see this tried, because it would backfire spectacularly > and the resulting news coverage might help the anti-spam cause. It's been tried. As a matter of fact, spammin' Murray Sabrin just finished spamming people all over the world for donations to his "exploratory committee". People who complained about the spam were threatened with lawsuits and told to "get a life". Sabrin posted at least two apologies for the spam, but more than one person reported receiving *more* spam from his "exploratory committee" less than eighteen hours after one of these apologies. One person who claimed to have checked said that no such exploratory committee was registered with the state of New Jersey, though the time for such required registrations had long passed. Angry recipients of the spam went to his web site forum and posted anti- spam messages which were *all* removed; at least one person said he posted a message which did not mention spam but wasn't flattering to Sabrin, and that was also removed; all visitors to the forum reported seeing nothing but praise messages. This from the person whose complaint replies spoke of "open forum" and "free speech". One person reported that Sabrin's web site contained a pointer to a pornography site, and supplied information to help others find it. No one refuted his claim. Many of the spamfighters from news.admin.net-abuse.email have sent or plan to send campaign contributions to incumbent Frank Lautenberg, attached to notes explaining that the money is sent in opposition of his spamming wanna-be opponent. Sabrin is by no means the first to run a political spampaign. To my knowledge, all but one who have lost their respective elections. is an excellent story on the debacle. Several Usenet threads, containing the usual rants and flames as well as a lot of good information and research, can be viewed at DejaNews by searching for "murray sabrin", or possibly via the following overly long URL: | Cliff Sharp | All relevant people are pertinent. | | WA9PDM | All rude people are impertinent. | | | Therefore, no rude people are relevant. | | | --Solomon W. Golomb | [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What was he supposed to be exploring? That's one that has not discovered my address I guess; I have never gotten any mail from him. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: A Growing Compatibility Issue: Computers and Privacy Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 17:40:38 -0500 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarq.com Anyone have any comments about "Transparent Society" by David Brin? It's not a science fiction novel, but a discussion of some of the problems and benefits of such tracking that Brin just assumes will come about due to economic or safety concerns -- and in more than just computer ID numbers -- such things as store cameras and such.. > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wouldn't it be rather interesting if > someone developed a cross reference database -- open for public use -- > of all those Intel serial numbers as they came into wide use. Maybe we should have one ... [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think it is a great idea. In a note I received yesterday, someone told me that bigbrother.com is already taken, but I am sure there is some name that would be good for the site; bigbrother.org perhaps ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: Bill Newkirk Subject: Re: House Bill Protects Cell Phone Privacy Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 17:48:21 -0500 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarq.com Monty Solomon wrote in message ... > FROM FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1999 > available on the open market, although the new bill makes that > technology illegal, too. Now all the House has to do is get the Senate They're going to ban cable ready tv's and VTRs? ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #32 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 12 13:04:40 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id NAA08904; Fri, 12 Mar 1999 13:04:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 13:04:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903121804.NAA08904@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #33 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Mar 99 13:04:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 33 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Security Conference Announcement - Black Hat Briefings '99 (Blackhat'99) Book Review: "Internet Complete", Sybex (Rob Slade") Dial `M' For Mad Phone Users (Tad Cook) Area Code 856 Announced For Southwestern New Jersey (Linc Madison) VTC, Data Network Eng. & Programmers Needed Immediately! (Thomas A. Baer) Net Rumors Fry Stock Guru (Monty Solomon) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 10:49:37 +0000 From: blackhat '99 Reply-To: blackhat@defcon.org Organization: DEF CON Communications Subject: Security Conference Announcement - The Black Hat Briefings '99 The Black Hat Briefings '99 http://www.blackhat.com/ July 7 - 8th, Las Vegas, Nevada Computer Security Conference Announcement Computer Security Conference Description and Overview It's late. You're in the office alone, catching up on some system administration tasks. Behind you, your network servers hum along quietly, reliably. Life is good. No one can get to your data or disrupt your WAN. The network is secure. Or is it? While we could create more fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD), we would rather announce The Black Hat Briefings '99 conference! The Black Hat Briefings conference series was created to provide in-depth information about current and potential threats against computer systems by the people who discover the threats. To do this, we assemble a group of vendor neutral security professionals and let them talk candidly about the security problems businesses face and the solutions they see to those problems. No gimmicks, just straight talk by people who make it their business to explore the ever-changing security space. While many conferences focus on information and network security, only The Black Hat Briefings will put your managers, engineers, and software programmers face-to-face with today's cutting edge computer security experts and "underground" security specialists. New for 1999, there will be three tracks of speaking. The "White Hat" track will inform your CEO or CIO with no-nonsense information about what issues to be aware of, and what they can ignore. The two "Black Hat" tracks will provide your technical staff with nitty-gritty technical information about current and potential threats to your computer systems. Only the Black Hat Briefings conference will provide your staff with the pragmatic tools and knowledge they need to help thwart those lurking in the shadows of your fire wall or the depths of your company's WAN. The reality is they are out there [back to the FUD]. The choice is yours -- you can live in fear of them, or you can learn from people like them. Conference Overview Spanning two days with three separate tracks, The Black Hat Briefings will focus on the vital security issues facing organizations with large Enterprise networks and mixed network operating systems. Topics will Include Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS), Computer Forensics (CF)systems, Incident Response, Hostile Mobile Code, vulnerability analysis, secure programming techniques, tool selection for creating and effectively monitoring your networks, and management issues related to computer security. You will be put face-to-face with the people developing the tools used by and against hackers. This year the Black Hat Briefings has grown to include a separate track specifically designed for the CEO and CIO. This third track, nick named the "White Hat" track, was developed by the National Computer Security Center (NCSC) of the National Security Agency. While the other tracks have a technology focus, this track is for people who have to manage an organization's security posture. What should you look for when hiring an outside security consultant? Should you even look outside your organization? What are the potential security threats? What should you do to reduce the risk of losses due to computer security incidents? The "White Hat" track will help you answer these questions. The Black Hat Briefings has developed a reputation for lively and in-depth presentations and discussions between "underground" security celebrities, vendors, and attendees. This year you can expect more visual demonstrations, more speakers who are authoritative in their fields, and, as always, an excellent time. As an added bonus, people who attend The Black Hat Briefings get free admission to DEF CON 7.0, the largest Hacker convention in the US, held right after Black Hat in Las Vegas. For more information see the DEFCON web site at http://www.defcon.org/. Speakers: Current Speakers include the following. - Bruce Schneier, author of Blowfish, TwoFish and Applied Cryptography. - Marcus Ranum, CEO of Network Flight Recorder and designer of the first commercial fire wall. - Dominique Brezinski, Network Security Consultant. - Greg Hogland, Author of the Asmodeous NT scanner and the Web Trends security scanner. - Peter Stephenson, Principle consultant of the Intrusion Management and Forensics Group. - The Simple Nomad, of the Nomad Mobile Research Centre. - Dr. Mudge, L0pht Heavy Industries, Inc. - Adam Shostack, Netect. More speakers will be listed as the call for papers ends on March 15th. Location: The Venetian Resort and Casino Las Vegas, NV (http://www.venetian.com/) Registration Costs Registration costs are $995 US before June 14th 1999. Late registration fees are $1,195 after June 14th. You may cancel your registration before July 1st for a full refund. This fee includes two days of speaking, materials, a reception, and meals. To register, please visit http://www.blackhat.com/ Sponsors: Secure Computing Corporation (http://www.securecomputing.com/) The National Computer Security Center (NCSC) Network Flight Recorder (http://www.nfr.com/) Counterpane Systems (http://www.counterpane.com/) Aventail (http://www.aventail.com/) More Information: email: blackhat@defcon.org with email questions or visit http://www.blackhat.com/ for the latest speakers and events listings. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 07:59:21 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Internet Complete", Sybex Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINCMPL.RVW 990204 "Internet Complete", Sybex, 1998, 0-7821-2409-7, U$19.99/C$28.95 %A Sybex %C 1151 Marina Village Parkway, Alameda, CA 94501 %D 1998 %G 0-7821-2409-7 %I Sybex Computer Books %O U$19.99/C$28.95 510-523-8233 800-227-2346 Fax: 510-523-2373 %P 1022 p. %T "Internet Complete" A rather daunting title to try to live up to, thousand pages or no thousand pages. In fact, this book is a kind of sampler, but of other Sybex books, kind of like a "compilation" album of various bands and singers. If you look at the "Contents at a Glance" (there is a second, more detailed table of contents running to seventeen pages) you will note that each chapter is taken from another book. (One is reminded of the old line from a Tom Lehrer song that "Index I stole from old Vladivostok telephone directory.") Part one presents the basics of the Internet. Chapter one talks about the history of the net, although the authors obviously misunderstand a number of aspects. (As one example, the statement is made that the Internet was developed specifically for UNIX, when it would be more accurate to say that, because those who did most of the work in producing software for the Internet worked with UNIX computers, any particular application tended to appear for that platform first.) In addition, the later parts of the chapter show one of the failings of this type of book: several points are rather out of date by now. The connection advice given in chapter two is oddly inconsistent in the currency of its material (it discusses Windows 98 but the fastest modems mentioned are 33.6K) and short on details (when it gets to the important stuff, it tells you to go ask your service provider for information). General facts are somewhat misleading and most of the text concentrates on the minutiae of specific programs when we get to email in chapter three. The common advice is better in the advanced email topics in chapter four, but hugely overshadowed by the general details. Part two turns to Web browsing. Chapter five's introduction presents very brief mentions of a number of Web topics, but misses a great many as well. Netscape Navigator is demonstrated reasonably well in chapter six, and Internet Explorer even better in seven (although IE security info is very weak). Web searching is handled well in chapter eight. It seems odd to find the subjects lumped under the Web, but chapters nine through eleven do a middling job of describing news, channels (applicable almost exclusively to Win98), and other Internet applications. Part three at first appears to have little relevance to the Internet, being specific to America Online. Searching (twelve), and chat (fifteen) do have some general content. Part four looks at creating your own Web page. The introduction to HTML (HyperText Markup Language) is pretty good, although you can tell that the authors aren't really familiar with it (the "end paragraph" tag is almost universally "assumed" and the syntax for the fairly straightforward name tag isn't given). Planning advice in seventeen is short but sound, whereas the design suggestions in eighteen tend to the fancy, if not fanciful. Nineteen rehashes HTML while twenty runs through the options on Microsoft's FrontPage. It's hard to see what part five's look at hardware has to do with the net. The chapter on modems might, except that the level of detail is too sparse to allow the average user to succeed in setting one up. Buying, memory, and maintenance all have helpful tips (although they all miss points, too). The chapter on browser add-ons hardly counts as hardware, and I can't fathom why it wasn't put in with the browser stuff. Part six has three appendices. The first is a command reference for Win98, again, hardly relevant to the net. The Internet dictionary does seem to have a preponderance of Internet terms, although it is hard to understand the benefit of having specific local ISPs (Internet Service Providers) listed by name, plus a heavy dose of UNIX. (The entry for "virus" is predictably bad.) The HTML reference is heavy on tables of colours and symbols, but fails to provide syntax examples for tags and attributes. As with many books with multiple authors a mix of good and bad. Maybe not the greatest advertising sample Sybex could have fielded. A relative bargain in terms of cost per pound, but, because of the poor quality of some important areas, new users would probably be better off with much smaller books such as "Zen and the Art of the Internet" (cf. BKZENINT.RVW) or "The Internet Book" (cf. BKINTBOK.RVW). copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKINCMPL.RVW 990204 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com On the other hand, you have different fingers. Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Subject: Dial `M' For Mad Phone Users Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 15:38:02 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) (This is from the San Jose Mercury News. Wasn't that John Higdon's favorite newspaper?? :> ) Dial `M' for mad phone users *State: Bay Area leads in unhappy customers and, says Pac Bell, high expectations. By Deborah Kong Mercury News Staff Writer People in the Bay Area filed the most complaints with state regulators about telephone service quality last year, grumbling that they sometimes had to wait weeks for installation or repairs. Residents and businesses who lodged complaints from the 408 area code waited an average of 37 days for a primary or secondary phone line to be installed. Disgruntled customers in 510 waited even longer -- 57 days -- according to an analysis of complaints filed with state regulators. When it came to waits for repairs, those in the 408 area waited an average of 26 days. In 510 it was 28 days. Customers in the 650 and 415 area codes also filed dozens of complaints about long waits, missed appointments and other service issues. In all, almost 600 complaints about Pacific Bell, GTE and other local phone companies were received by the California Public Utilities Commission's consumer services division in 1998. The commission's Office of Ratepayer Advocates analyzed the data to determine where the problems were concentrated and found about a fifth of all complaints in California came just from the 408 region. The ratepayer office said the volume of complaints from the Bay Area did drop from 1997. Pacific Bell spokesman John Britton said the company has made significant progress in improving service quality by repairing wires and investing $800 million in a building program. It has also hired more than 1,200 service technicians since its merger with SBC Communications Inc. about two years ago. "It doesn't seem to be an issue," Britton said, noting that 128 people in the 408 area registered complaints, a tiny portion of the 1.1 million lines the company operates there. "We're in a major construction phase all over the South Bay, (but) we don't have the infrastructure to give every single customer three and four phone lines." Britton attributed much of the installation and repair waits -- which he said were concentrated from late 1996 through the summer of 1997 -- to explosive demand for telephone lines. As more and more people requested a second line for Internet access or home offices, particularly in Silicon Valley, the number of lines installed statewide jumped from 360,000 in 1995 to 809,000 in 1997, he said. "When you look at the population in the Silicon Valley, this high-tech type of customer that goes to work in these high-tech jobs at the cutting edge of the information age, when they get home they don't want to revert back to the stone age of telecommunications," Britton said. "They want the same capabilities in their home they're used to in their office. We've got customers with eight and nine phone lines in their house." `At their wits' end' But Dale Piiru, a senior analyst in the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, said the complaints represent worst-case scenarios "where people are kind of at their wits' ends." Many more, he said, may never file formal complaints because they don't know where to go and simply give up. The 408 region also led the state in complaints in which lack of available phone lines was the reason installation was delayed. It also led the state when it came to outside wiring problems delaying repairs, complaints about static and other noise on phone lines and missed repair and installation appointments. The report was released as a proposal for new service quality standards has stalled. The proposed new rules were withdrawn from the commission's Jan. 20 agenda and won't reappear until June at the earliest. They call for: Ninety percent of orders for new telephone service to be completed in five days if they are for primary lines. Ninety percent of secondary line installations would have to be completed in 10 days. Giving customers free installation, which typically costs $75 to $80 for a basic residential line, if work is not completed within eight working days of when the order was placed. Consumers would receive a credit on their bills. Streamlining the system to make it easier for customers to get a credit if service was out for more than 24 hours. Eighty five percent of operator-assisted calls to be answered within 10 seconds; 85 percent of local directory assistance calls to be answered within 12 seconds; 80 percent of repair calls phoned in to be answered by a live person within 20 seconds. The proposal was withdrawn after the term of the commissioner assigned to the issue expired. The remaining commissioners wanted to hear additional comments from phone companies and consumer groups, said Lester Wong, telecom adviser to Commissioner Richard A. Bilas. A new proposal is expected later this spring. One question has been whether the new rules would apply solely to dominant local phone companies such as Pacific Bell and GTE or to other competitors, too. Charles Carbone of the Utility Consumers' Action Network said his group has seen customer service significantly declining for Pac Bell customers. `Very reactive approach' "The commission's stance thus far has been, `We will address customer service problems when the damage is done,' " Carbone said. "It's a very reactive approach, which is, `We're going to intervene when there's been a massive market failure.' " Britton said Pac Bell is continuing to focus on speedier repair and installations. He noted that the average time for repairs has gone from about five to six days to one or two days; waits for installations decreased from six or seven days to three or four. Piiru of the ratepayer advocates said his office will also be looking into Pac Bell's hiring and other changes it's made. A survey of 1,500 customers statewide that will present a more complete picture of customers' views is due out in a few weeks, he said. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 19:41:39 -0800 From: Telecom@LincMad.com.NOSPAM (Linc Madison) Subject: Area Code 856 Announced For Southwestern New Jersey Organization: LincMad Consulting Bell Atlantic issued a press release on Tuesday announcing that the new area code for southwestern New Jersey will be 856. The new code will serve Camden and Vineland and nearby communities, while Trenton, Atlantic City, and Cape May retain the 609 area code. Permissive dialing begins June 12, 1999, and mandatory dialing begins November 13, 1999. The test number has not yet been announced, but a list of affected prefixes is available on the Bell Atlantic web site: The unanswered question in this case is why the New Jersey Bureau of Public Utilities waited so long to reach a decision. The matter was pending for many months, during most of which the BPU sat on the issue, saying nothing and doing nothing. Now they announce the split with barely eight months before the mandatory date. Mark another entry in my regulatory "hall of shame." ** Do not send me unsolicited commercial e-mail spam of any kind ** Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * Telecom@LincMad-com URL:< http://www.lincmad.com > * North American Area Codes & Splits >> NOTE: if you autoreply, you must delete the "NOSPAM" << ------------------------------ From: Thomas A. Baer Subject: Employment Opportunity: VTC, Data Network Eng. & Programmers Date: 12 Mar 1999 12:13:39 GMT Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services VTC, Data Network Eng. & Programmers Needed Immediately! Good day, let me introduce myself. I'm the executive vice president of Indego/CTC headquartered in Washington DC. We are a small business which is rapidly growing. Indego specializes in Advanced Training/I.T./Telecom Solutions and Services. Our clients profiles are: U.S. Navy, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Frontier Telecommunications Inc., Barquin Associates Inc., Metamor Inc., and the Bank of Mexico to name a few. We are a integral part of the Information Technology, Telecom, and Training arena as well as one of the only companies in the U.S. that specializes in Information Security/Warfare (INFOSEC/INFOWAR). We have recently been awarded a teaming contract with a major international bank to design, develop, maintain, operate, and train a "Tele-Video Conferencing" Systems. I am writing to find qualified personnel who would be interested in coming onboard (New Jersey and Northern Virginia area) as either a W2 or 1099 employee. I am looking for team compositions made up of the following professionals: - Sr. Technology Analyst (VTC Picture Tel) IMMEDIATE NEED - Data Network Engineer - Interface Developer for PROGESS RDBS - C/S Developers (Tuxedo Middleware a plus) (Team1) Individuals to analyze and resolve VTC service problems. Perform the functions necessary to install new VTC equipment and lines. Coordinate plans and provide status updates on related project work. Provide education to various groups: technicians, end-users,. Comply with established procedures and perform self audits as required, maintain accurate inventory of all equipment. Maintain educational level around VTC technology: Picture Tel Users Group. These individuals need to be current on Picture Tel Teleconferencing Unites, Picture Tel Maintenance Control Units (MCU-multi-point video bridge), video multiplexers (I-mux), video network requirements (DS1, ISDN, BRI), software scheduling tools. (Team2) individuals who can work with the technical team to develop complete sets of networks designs, evaluate all actions for the successful installation/implementation of the project; support all meetings required with the Business Unit and the Project Team; Document all project plans, redundancy plans and diagrams to support the entire rollout of this project. I need a person that has UNIX (HP-UX preferred), Windows NT, Database Architecture, TCP/IP, Bay Networks (Routers), Cabletron (Switches), WAN (T1, T3, Sonet, etc) NT networking, Ethernet/Token Ring, FDDI, etc. experience. (Team3) Individuals will perform analysis, design and construction of software based on business needs, conceptual and technical designs. Conduct and support Unite, System, Integration and Unite Acceptance Testing. Also to participate in SDM activities (code walkthrough). These professionals need skills in C/C++, (PB optional), SQL (Sybase preferred), Platforms: UNIX (HP-UX preferred) & Windows NT; and if possible with middleware of Tuxedo (preferred), and Sybase OpenServer/Open Client. Call me TODAY!! I look forward to hearing from you ... Also please forward a copy of your latest resume. Thank You, and once again, I look forward to hearing from you Thomas A. Baer Exec. V.P., Indego/CTC (703) 830-0710 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 01:19:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Net Rumors Fry Stock Guru Wired News Report 7:40 a.m. 9.Mar.99.PST Here's a switch: A company is claiming that the Internet gives users too much privacy. Wade Cook Financial has filed a slander suit against 10 anonymous users of a Yahoo bulletin board, hoping, it says, to strike a blow against rumormongering on the Internet. http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/18346.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is quite true that for many years, really since the inception of the net, netters have often times considered themselves poor betrodden people targeted by large corpor- ations, etc. Netters are always being *spammed*; netters are always having their *privacy invaded*; netters are always being *cheated and defrauded* in some way, or having law enforcement authorities look askance at them. And all this is true, but there are two sides to every coin, and at least a few netters can be downright vicious with their rumor-mongering tongues which wag day and night in the newsgroups, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #33 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 12 14:00:41 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA11852; Fri, 12 Mar 1999 14:00:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 14:00:41 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903121900.OAA11852@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #34 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Mar 99 14:00:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 34 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson 311-KLondike 5-xxxx ; SAC 310 ; TWX (Mark J Cuccia) Re: "310-555-2368" (Terry Knab) Book Review: "Public Access to the Internet", Kahin/Kelle (Rob Slade) Bellcore Has Changed its Name to Telcordia Technologies (Stacey) More on Bellcore Name Change (Mark J Cuccia) Letter to Elliot Maxwell(NTIA) on DNS Problem (Ronda Hauben) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 11:35:31 CST From: Mark J Cuccia Reply-To: Mark J Cuccia Subject: 311-KLondike 5-xxxx ; SAC 310 ; TWX TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Joseph Singer : > write out a presumably 'ficticious' number for illustration purposes. > I wonder if anyone anywhere has ever been assigned '310-555-2368', > the number which for many years appeared in the front pages of phone > directories as an example of long distance direct dialing? PAT] And Joseph Singer replied: > Actually, if you'll take a look at Bell System ads the number was: > Area Code 311 555-2368 and before ANC it was MAin 0-2368 > Us savvy telecom people know that 311 can only be used as a service > code such as 411 for directory, 611 for repair, 911 for emergencies, > etc. And in the very late 1950's and into the early 1960's, the ad's for Telco indicated the number in a card on a pictured telephone as: Area Code 311 KLondike 5- 2368 Many a TV/Radio episode or Motion Picture beginning in the late 1950's and continuing thru most of the 1960's would FREQUENTLY quote a "fictitious" telephone number as: KL.5-xxxx or KLondike 5-xxxx I've posted here in the Digest in the past about some early 1960's episodes of "Leave it to Beaver", "Hazel" and "Twilight Zone", where the number quoted or displayed was as such. I even think that the 1969 (1st season) episode of "The Brady Bunch" where Mike switches the home telephone service to COIN/PAYPHONE (due to everyone in the house running up a BIG local message unit monthly bill), and the coin phone, IIRC, was a BEIGE 3-coin-slot one... at one point, when Mike was trying to make an outgoing call for his business and ran into local overtime, and the operator demanded more money, he said something about "KLondike 5". The TV-Land Cable Channel has shown a late 1960's episode of Mannix, where a deaf-mute woman reads the lips of a man in a phone booth. The man is hired to murder the client's wife. She also saw the telephone number he dialed out on the payphone. Joe Mannix tries to get the woman to remember the number, and keeps emphesizing over and over to her: "What's the number - KLONDIKE-5, WHAT!?" Even a fictitious Los Angeles telephone directory is opened up, and you see a mixture of 'KL 5-' and 555- Of course, 'KL 5' = 555, and 555 has been the fictitious exchange quoted in radio/TV/movie fiction beginning in the mid-60's when ANC, All Number Calling became more widespread. But I wonder if KLondike-5-1212 was ever "officially quoted" as the number to call for "Information" in distant Numbering Plan Areas! I also wonder what the *EXACT* date in the late 1950's or early 1960's was when The Bell System introduced KL5-1212 (or 555-1212) for customers who actually had originating DDD access were able to DIAL their own calls to distant NPA's for "Information" - AND FOR FREE at that time, TOO! And, UNlike what AT&T/MCI/Sprint/ many others do today by routing to "contract" incompitent pseudo DA, the REAL Bell System / American Tel & Tel routed (FOR FREE) to the REAL (and ONLY) "Information" operator in that dialed NPA in the US/Canada! :-}))) Also, as for SAC 310 ... Sometime in the 1960's, it seems that AT&T "reserved" 310 for SOMETHING to be done with TWX or DATAPHONE (switched 50KBPS?), but it was never really implemented. Four-Row / ASCII-8-bit / 100-speed TWX was using Special Area Codes 510, 610, 710, 810, 910 since the early 1960's. 510 was for 4-Row TWX all over the continental US, but in smaller towns which weren't on the dedicated "TWX Switching Plan"- 610 was for TWX (there was ONLY 4-Row, never 3-Row TWX) in Canada- 710, 810, 910 were for (4-Row) TWX service in specific parts of the US, and routed/switched on the "dedicated TWX Switching Plan": 710 for TWX in the northeast US (Today's Bell Atlantic states, including SNET in CT) 810 for TWX in parts of today's Ameritech's midwest (except WI, IL, northwest IN), also for Cincinnati Bell in OH, and in the southeast states (today's BellSouth) 910 for TWX "roughly" west of the Mississippi River -- today's Ameritech's WI/IL/northwest IN, today's USWest, today's Southwestern Bell, today's Pac*Bell/Nevada*Bell There was NEVER any TWX in Mexico, Alaska, Hawaii, Caribbean, altho' there was WUTCO's (and other carriers') TELEX, though! (For further details or clarifications on TWX, Telex, etc., I have posted much in the past to numbered issues of the Digest, as well as special reports in the Archives!) The 410 code was never reserved back in the 1960's, as some areas in the NANP dialed 410 for Repair Service, or 41(0)X for test functions. I don't think that Bell had "reserved" 210 for anything specific in the future, back in the 1960's/70's. But AT&T (Bell) _DID_ "reserve" 310 for SOMETHING, which MAY or may NOT have ever been activated. Many of my retiree friends from Long Lines, Labs, etc. _DO_ remember that 310 was intended for "something" but they can't remember what! In 1979, even the AT&T Long Lines "Traffic Routing Guide" listed 310 in the NPA/SAC numerical list as "Western Union - Reserved". (In the 1970's, AT&T transferred the "marketing" of TWX in the US over to WUTCO, but the service itself was still routed/switched/dialed/etc. over the Bell System Telephone Network itself. Circa 1981, TWX in the US (but NOT in Canada where it was ALWAYS a telco service until it disappeared altogather, circa 1995) was completely turned over to WUTCO, which now did their OWN switching/etc. of the US TWX service, thus the N10 SAC NPA's (EXCEPT for 610 in Canada) no longer had any "telephone" or "DDD/NANP" meaning. AT&T 'reclaimed' them and made them 'spare' as well. But on _WUTCO's_OWN_ TWX network, _THEY_ used 310 as a temporary access code for (US) TWX customers to dial or connect into non-WUTCO domestic _TELEX_ networks, such as those of ITT, WUI/MCI, TRT, FTCC, Graphnet, etc. This had _NOTHING_ to do with any telephone use of 310 (anymore) but only some form of historical artifact. Circa 1990/91, US TWX was turned back to AT&T from WUTCO, AS WELL AS WUTCO's _OWN_ (original) Telex network! I don't know how much TWX or Telex still exists in the US, however. But back in the 1960's/70's, there _WAS_SOMETHING_SPECIAL_ reserved for 310. It was SOMETIMES included in a list or count of ALL area codes, including "special" area codes (such as TWX' N10's, and 800 / 900), but I still don't know _WHAT_ it was specifically "reserved" for! BTW, since the TWX N10 SAC NPA's no longer had anything to do with the Telephone network beginning in 1981 or so, AT&T eventually planned to have those N10's re-assigned to TELEPHONE purposes, such as "splits" in the future. The first non-TWX use of an N10 was in 1983, when AT&T assigned 710 to the US Federal Government. (See earlier Digest issues circa Feb/Mar 1986, for further details about 710). In 1991, 510 took effect CA in the split of 415 in San Francisco Metro. In 1991, 410 (NEVER was a TWX code) took effect in MD, in the split of NPA 301. In 1991, 310 (that one-time "Special Reserved Code") took effect in CA, in the continuing split of 213 in southern California. In 1992, 210 (NEVER was a TWX code) took effect in TX, in the split of NPA 512. In 1993, 910 took effect in NC, in the split of NPA 919. In 1993, 810 took effect in "northern" MI, in the split of NPA 313. In early 1994, 610 (Canada, in Oct.1993, swapped 610 for its own 600 for cellular, special numbering/routing, future "satellite mobile", data, and remaining but soon to be discontinued TWX) took effect in southeastern PA, in the split of NPA 215. But I still wish I could determine the actual intent and detailed history of what 310 was going to be used for - and also any specifics on that one/two day Overseas experimental dialing using 200 and other N00 area codes, from Philadelphia! MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mark, I wonder if you are mistaken about 410 ... I am just positive I saw 410 listed *years* ago as the 'area code' for TWX service along the east coast. Also, WUTCO had a message store and forward service called 'Smart (something)' which also provided news/weather bulletins, etc and in my dimmest memory I seem to recall instructions in an old WUTCO subscriber directory which have the number for using that service, and it was 410-something. Also, I thought 410-555-1212 was the nationwide number for TWX directory assistance. Check your very old TWX directories from the 1960's and clear this up. Also, when WUTCO operated its 'EasyLink' message service all email boxes had 910-xxx-xxxx numbers assigned to them regardless of geographic location. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tknab@nyx.net (Terry Knab) Subject: Re: "310-555-2368" Organization: The Home Office Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 09:37:06 GMT TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to Joseph Singer : > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not certain what you mean by your > term 'net-way' ... but I can tell you I do not think I would care to > have such a phone number, at least not with charges being paid for > with my money. There are too many people getting '1212' confused with > '1234' when they dial toll-free directory assistance, and there are > many people who would use an example such as his number when they > write out a presumably 'ficticious' number for illustration purposes. > I wonder if anyone anywhere has ever been assigned '310-555-2368', the > number which for many years appeared in the front pages of phone > directories as an example of long distance direct dialing? PAT] And our friends at the North American Numbering Plan Administration have a nice web page written up about 555 number (yes they are assigned to folks). They list every number in assignment today. (I have no idea what those numbers actually -do- their site is: http://www.nanpa.com Terry E. Knab News Administrator Nyx Public Access Unix ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 08:29:36 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Public Access to the Internet", Kahin/Kelle Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKPBACIN.RVW 990207 "Public Access to the Internet", Brian Kahin/James Keller, 1995, 0-262-61118-X, U$20.00 %E Brian Kahin kahin@harvard.edu %E James Keller keller@ksgrsch.harvard.edu %C 55 Hayward Street, Cambridge, MA 02142-1399 %D 1995 %G 0-262-61118-X %I MIT Press %O U$20.00 800-356-0343 fax: 617-625-6660 www-mitpress.mit.edu %P 390 p. %T "Public Access to the Internet" Perhaps not quite addressing the current discussion of "public access," with it's heavy emphasis on subsidized access for the poor and those in rural communities, the papers in this book were written at a time of initial reaction to the commercialization of what had, up until then, been primarily an academic and research network. The first part looks at the US public access agenda of the day. Brian Kahin's paper starts off by noting that the National Information Infrastructure plans misunderstood the nature of the value of the Internet by seeing it as some kind of inexpensive carrier, when it was, instead, the access to information that was of value, in the model of the public library. The tension between commercial and public access interests is noted by Lewis Branscomb, with the poignant metaphor of television pointing to past failures. A number of public access issues are raised, but not addressed in detail, by James Keller. Sociology and culture are unfortunately not dealt with well in part two. The WELL is an interesting success in online history, but Cliff Figallo's paper does not relate closely to public access overall. (As only one example, the essay cites numerous cases where direct public meetings with participants helped resolve problems.) Sproul and Faraj try to look at the social technology of the net but do not present any significant findings. Part three tries to look at the establishment of network communities. Beverly Hunter presents a lot of educational theory, a few limited anecdotes, and not much relation to public access. Using Big Sky Telegraph as an example, Frank Odasz makes a good case for low cost, efficient, BBS based community networking models of public access, and presents one of the high points in the book. George Baldwin's look at public access for Native Americans is unfocussed. A look at the provision of service through libraries, by Carol Henderson and Frederick King, is anecdotal and lacks analysis. Part four discusses new classes of users. Richard Civille uses statistics to show that the gap between rich and poor is widening, and infers that the poor will be increasingly disadvantaged, but cannot either strongly support his position or articulate remedial actions. A list of what people "want" from Internet access is Daniel Dern's contribution. Miles Fidelman looks briefly at various technologies for "local loop" access. Although it purports to look at architectural and policy implications of the variety of new users on the net, Terrence McGarty and Carole Haywood produce only a confused overview of telecommunications uses. The final section deals with pricing and service. Jeffrey MacKie- Mason and Hal Varian use tables of prices and graphs and economic formulae to support a middle of the road non-recommendation that everyone be involved. Scott Shenker at least provides one new factor, quality of service, for his limited proposal. A telephone network model is the basis of Michael Einhorn's paper. Hans-Werner Braun and Kimberley Claffy call for more study and data. What is most disappointing is to see how little progress has been made in the past four years. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKPBACIN.RVW 990207 rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Freebie Mags: http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/magazine.htm Robert Slade's Guide to Computer Viruses, 0-387-94663-2 (800-SPRINGER) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 11:25:36 -0500 From: Stacey Subject: Bellcore Has Changed its Name to Telcordia Technologies. Just to let you know that Bellcore has changed its name to Telcordia Technologies. As part of the sale of Bellcore to SAIC, Bellcore was no longer entitled to use the "Bell" in the name and thus had to change its name. The "Tel" portion of our new name speaks of our telecommunications expertise and focus. The "cordia" portion brings to mind the scope of the work we do -- designing and building communications systems, bringing into "accord" the many elements that together comprise our complex networks. And our new tag line, "Performance from Experience," reminds everyone of our extraordinary past accomplishments and expected future success. Telcordia's website will be www.telcordia.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 11:34:30 -0600 (CST) From: Mark J Cuccia Reply-To: Mark J Cuccia Subject: More on Bellcore Name Change On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: SAIC's Telcordia Technologies, formerly (SAIC) Bellcore It was announced on Tuesday (9 March 1999): Bellcore's new name is "Telcordia Technologies [tm]". note: SAIC's Bellcore's new name is 'TEL-cordia', NOT 'TELE-cordia'. They can't continue to use the "Bell" in their name since they are owned by SAIC rather than the Regional Bell Telephone Corporations now, but seem to continue with "Tel-" in their name. There's a new logo -- it looks like two sea-waves or two flags waving in the wind. I was told that this represents two stylized 'Ts' to indicate Telcordia Technologies. http://www.bellcore.com will still show the Bellcore URL in the URL display, but it goes to the same page that http://www.telcordia.com goes to. The Traffic Routing Administration (TRA) website of the SAIC/Bellcore/Telcordia organization will continue to be found at: http://www.trainfo.com TRA's website has MANY USEFUL NANP numbering/dialing/routing and rating/billing related resources, SOME of which, such as the monthly NNAG (NPA-NXX Activity Guide), can be downloaded for FREE! Over the next several months, the 1970's-on "Bell System" logo and the name Bellcore will disappear, being replaced by Telcordia. For a while, they will also sometimes have "formerly Bellcore" displayed with the "Telcordia Technologies". A bit of history here ... Bellcore was formed circa 1983/84 as part of Greene's imposed destruc... "breakup" of the "One Bell Telephone System". The name is an acronym for "Bell Communications Research, Inc.", which had temporarily been called during the 1982/83 transition, as the "Central Services Organization", or CSO for short. Bellcore was originally created to handle various "common meeting point" aspects of the US (and North American) telephone industry which the pre-divestiture AT&T handled as the parent company of The Bell System. One of the primary functions was for maintenance of telephone standards for National Security and Emergency Preparedness [IMO: "whatever that means - only 'big brother' knows, for sure, 'for our own best interests' - who are WE to 'question big brother'"]. It was later determined that many various aspects of US/NANP telephony standards, particularly Network Routing (and Rating) (TRA) and North American Numbering (NANPA) would be handled or at least 'overseen' by Bellcore. The staff of Bellcore would be from the (at the time SEVEN) Regional Bell Holding Corporations created as part of the divestiture, but also some of the original staff came from AT&T Headquarters, AT&T Long Lines, Western Electric and the Bell Telephone Laboratories. As far as numbering/dialing standards are concerned, the FCC started in inquiry circa 1992 to see if Bellcore was not as "impartial" as they could be in numbering/code assignments (Area Codes, Carrier Access Codes, etc), since competition was growing in other areas of the industry, yet Bellcore was still owned by the holding companies of the individual former Bell System Operating Telcos. In the meantime, Bellcore's ownership changed, when SAIC bought out the shares held by the various Bell Telcos. However, Lockheed-Martin won the bid for the contract as the new NANP Administrator for numbering/dialing standards. EVEN THAT might change soon, since LM wants to get into PROVIDING telecom services as well as purchasing Comsat, thus they want to transfer NANPA/etc. over to Warburg-Pincus & Co. Ltd, an investment company. The new Telcordia Technologies will still be involved in various NANP-based telephony standards, such as "Common Language Standards" (CLLI-codes, etc) for the telephone industry, as well as TRA as mentioned above, and continue to handle certain billing-specific standards for North America (RAO's, calling-card standards, etc). There are also some telecom acronyms which include a 'B' standing for Bellcore. I don't know how these are going to be changed. The (trademarked) slogan for the new company name is: "Telcordia Technologies - formerly Bellcore... Performance from Experience" [tm] MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- ------------------------------ From: rh120@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Ronda Hauben) Subject: Letter to Elliot Maxwell(NTIA) on DNS Problem Date: 10 Mar 1999 20:13:39 GMT Organization: Columbia University Reply-To: rh120@watsun.cc.columbia.edu I sent the following letter to Elliot Maxwell of the NTIA about the problem with the controlling points of the Internet (IP numbers, domain name system, root server system, protocols, and port numbers, etc.) being transferred into the hands of a private entity (ICANN) by the U.S. government and an entity that has no understanding of the technical and scientific issues of Internet operation and scaling. Dear Elliot Maxwell: Last summer Ira Magaziner spoke with me regarding the problems I saw with the IFWP process and the need to have a way to protect the controlling functions of the Internet that IANA was in charge of and to make it possible for them to scale. He asked me to submit a proposal or operational way of putting into practice what I was saying in my conversations with him. Subsequently in late August I submitted a proposal for a prototype to begin the process of creating a way to carry out the principles I was proposing to him. I subsequently also submitted that proposal to Karen Rose and Becky Burr. Unfortunately my proposal was never given consideration by the U.S. Department of Commerce, because had it been it would have been funded since there is a need to explore prototypes to deal with the problem of governance of the central functions of the Internet. I am requesting that you discuss my proposal with me as the ICANN situation just becomes more and more corrupt and infectious, as they are carrying out their activities in secret, have been created in secret in violation of the obligations of government to act under appropriate authority, and they fail to understand the great responsibility that rests with any entity that will have responsibility for the central functions of the Internet. At a meeting held by the Berkman Center in Boston on January 23, 1999, Elaine Kamarck, formerly an advisor for Vice President Gore and currently at the Kennedy School of Government, had been invited to speak. When she expressed her understanding that a membership organization was an inappropriate form for an entity that would have control over people's economic lives, the ICANN people present ignored what she said and changed the subject. This is a serious situation. In Canada an inappropriate form of organization was charged with administering the blood supply of the country. The result was that an aids infection got into the blood supply and caused all sorts of harm. The situation with ICANN is similar. They are an inappropriate form of organization for the control and ownership of what is essentially the blood supply of the Internet. And just as in Canada, so with the Internet, the damage that will be caused may not be obvious until it is too late to prevent the infection that will taint the blood supply. I will explain this further to you if you wish, but the Internet requires as any overseeing entity, a scientific and governmental entity that is under the necessary obligation and can take the necessary care to carry out the needed functions. My proposal provides a way to create such a body, and to do so in a way that involves the International community and the Internet community. My phone number is (212)787-9361. I look forward to talking with you about this before the situation grows out of hand any further. Sincerely, Ronda Hauben 244 West 72nd Street Apt. 15D New York, N.Y. co-author "Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet" published by IEEE Computer Society Press See testimony presented to Congress in "Joint Hearings before the Committee on Science Subcommittee on Basic Research and Subcommittee on Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, 105 Congress, 2nd Session, Oct. 7, 1998, (in No. 78), pg. 401-409. Also see proposal at NTIA web site "The Internet: An International Public Treasure and at http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/dns_proposal.txt) My proposal is also at: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/proposals/hauben ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #34 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 17 14:28:07 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA08077; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 14:28:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 14:28:07 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903171928.OAA08077@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #35 TELECOM Digest Wed, 17 Mar 99 14:28:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 35 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson TWX, Telex, Directory, etc. (was 310, TWX, etc.) (Mark J. Cuccia) Canadian Telco's Use of 310 Code (Annick Lemonnier) Press Release: Magazine Advertisement Research Study (Chris Middings) Discount Long Distance Digest Update Vol. 3, Number 1 (VanTek Commun) Question About Calling Cards (Jamie Falkosky) Iridium and Orbcomm (Stewart Fist) Local Call Dialing Question (Steve Wahl) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 10:01:40 -0600 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: TWX, Telex, Directory, etc. (was 310, TWX, etc.) PAT wrote: > TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Mark, I wonder if you are mistaken > about 410 ... I am just positive I saw 410 listed *years* ago as > the 'area code' for TWX service along the east coast. No, 410 was NEVER "used" as TWX "Special Area Code". There were just too many places where the telephone repair service (and TWX and telephone service shared the same network for switching/routing/etc. from 1962 until circa 1981 for the US - in Canada, TWX never did split away from the telephone network but TWX rather "ceased" to exist) was reached with 410 or 41(0)2 back in the 1960's/70's: Many "Step" parts of the US in the 1960's and 70's reached telephone repair service as 410. Some other areas dialed 41(0)2, the '0' being optional but when dialed, 'absorbed'. Other "service" codes and test codes in such SxS regions also used 41X or 41(0)X codes at that time, too. This was because in the late 50's / early 60's, the Vatic... I mean AT&T Headquarters - gave STRONG recommendations to the locals (although not all locals complied right away, some still used the old methods until the 1980's) that all areas (using mostly SxS) with '11X' service codes (112+ for DDD Access, 113 for "Information", 113 for Repair, etc) change over to N11 codes (which had been in use since the 1920's in Panel and #1XB urban areas) or three/seven digit NXX-(xxxx) codes/numbers, for such services and test functions. AT&T wanted the '1' to be used (at first only where needed for 'toll alerting', and planned for a later date now here for indicating ten digit calls as opposed to seven-digit calls) EXCLUSIVELY for DDD/CAMA access or ten-digit dialing. However, some SxS switches had 'kludges' to get away with 1+NXX- for DDD/CAMA access _AND_ 11X for service/test codes SIMULTANEOUSLY. Also, AT&T wanted '11-' for rotary-dial (or ten-button DTMF telphone) access to future "vertical services". The '11' is dialable in place of the 'star' button for such "*XX" codes. I can dial or DTMF 1167 in lieu of touchtoning *67 to supress my number from being displayed by the distant central office, or dial/DTMF 1170 in lieu of *70 to per-call cancel call waiting. But back to the 410 and 41(0)X for repair/service/test codes in many SxS regions... When AT&T strongly recommended that locals change SxS area's 11X codes to N11 or NXX-(xxxx), the most widely used 11X service could be said to be 113 for "Information" (Directory). Even Step-by-Step areas changed over to 411, just about EVERYWHERE. But to keep Step selector plant and conversion to a minimum, many of these SxS areas routed the '4+1' dialed digits to the same "miscellaneous code" selector levels that the old '11-' routed to. So, an additional '1' (for 411) went to Information, and other third digits for 41X, sometimes with an optional absorbed '0' as 41(0)X, went to things such as Repair or Test functions. The East Coast had ONLY two (or three if you consider 510 for small towns) TWX Special Area Codes, ever since TWX went "dial" in 1962: 710 for the "Northeast" (today's NYNX/BA and SNET states), and 810 for the "Southeast" also Ameritech's MI/OH/IN (except for that northwest part of Indiana near Chicago which used the 910 code for TWX along with Chicago). See the 1961 Automation Plans for TWX in the Archives. > Also, WUTCO had a message store and forward service called 'Smart > (something)' which also provided news/weather bulletins, etc and in > my dimmest memory I seem to recall instructions in an old WUTCO > subscriber directory which have the number for using that service, > and it was 410-something. There were (are?) some 41XX codes that _TELEX_ subscribers dialed. The WUTCO Telex network (always automated) began in 1958, and was _NOT_ part of the Bell System's _TWX_ Network (manual and distinct from the regular telephone network from 1931 to 1962; automated as dial and integrated into the US/Canadian DDD Telephone Network from 1962 to 1981). WUTCO's _TELEX_ 41XX Codes were used for News, Stock Quotes, etc. Also, I think that _TELEX_ customers (of WUTCO) also had some other three/four digit codes for similar things as well. > Also, I thought 410-555-1212 was the nationwide number for TWX > directory assistance. Check your very old TWX directories from the > 1960's and clear this up. Also, when WUTCO operated its 'EasyLink' > message service all email boxes had 910-xxx-xxxx numbers assigned to > them regardless of geographic location. PAT] (SAC 410 _NOT_ being used for TWX is mentioned above) Prior to sometime in the 1970's, US-based TWX customers simply dialed _JUST_ 555-1212 to reach national (US) TWX Directory (based in St.Louis MO). US-based TWX customers had to dial 610-555-1212 to reach Canadian TWX Directory. Canadian customers dialed 910-555-1212 to reach US TWX Directory (in St.Louis MO). In the 1970's or so, Canadian TWX customers dialed 610-555-1212 for Canadian TWX Directory, but I don't know if in the 1960's they could get by with "just" 555-1212 for national Canadian TWX directory. By the 1970's, even US TWX customers had to dial 910-555-1212 to reach US TWX Directory (St.Louis MO). Note this is 910, not 410, although the '9' and '4' sometimes "look alike". In 1970/71, AT&T turned over the "marketing" of US-based TWX to the business public, over to WUTCO. But for ten more years, just about everything INTERNAL to OPERATION of TWX was STILL being handled by the TELEPHONE company (AT&T/Bell/Independents). TWX in Canada always remained a function and marketing service of the telephone companies (TCTS / Telecom Canada / Stentor - whichever name they choose to be called by each decade). It was intended that WUTCO establish their own switching/routing network for US TWX, and there were minor/miscellaneous phases of turning over more and more responsibility of TWX operations over to WUTCO throughout the later 1970's. In 1981, WUTCO took over ALL TWX operations in the US away from AT&T/Bell/telco and off of the US portion of the DDD Telephone Network. So, as far as AT&T was concerned, 510/710/810/910 were no longer part of their network or numbering assignment plan. (610 for Canadian TWX, still being a part of the Canadian part of the telephone network, continued to be "assigned" as such). But _within_ WUTCO's _OWN_ network in the US, 510/710/810/910 had their own "TWX" functions, DISTINCT AND SEPARATE from the Telephone Network. By 1984, WUTCO began to "ignore" the original geographic or old-style routings that AT&T originally instituted in 1962 regarding the N10's for 4-row/ASCII TWX. Thus, WUTCO began to assign 510/710/810/910 numbers ANYWHERE in the US. The NNX "central office" code part of the N10-NNX-XXXX ten- digit TWX number also didn't 'have' to follow the old "telephone" network meanings anymore. Starting around 1984, WUTCO's _OWN_ TWX network began to have "c.o.codes" of the form N0X and N1X within the N10 "area" codes, and even 0XX and 1XX form TWX "c.o.codes". Thus, the ten-digit (WUTCO) TWX number (US) could be N10-_X_xx-xxxx! The N10 for WUTCO US-TWX still remained 510/710/810/910. Instead of having WUTCO switches in every city that the Bell System had used for TWX (remember, when Telco ran TWX in the 1960's/70's, there were central office switches which had TWX Class-of-Service in virtually EVERY town and city), WUTCO had only four or so major switching cities ONLY (see the report in the Archives from Canada on how Canadian TWX would interface with now-WUTCO US TWX, dated 1982). In a sense, there was a form of "portability" with TWX. WUTCO could use (now their own) 910 TWX-ONLY code to be assigned ANYWHERE in the US, ignoring the "old" AT&T/Bell meanings, since US-TWX now was no longer part of the AT&T / Bell System. MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- ------------------------------ Reply-To: Annick Lemonnier From: Annick Lemonnier Subject: Canadian Telco's Use of 310 Code Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 11:36:41 -0500 Hello, I would like to shed some light on your 310 issue. At least from the Bell Canada usage point of view. Two uses that I am aware of since I've been in the telco business. 1) As a technician we used the 310-xxxx as a test number that was associated to the switch itself (and was only local, no NPA was associated to it, until California got assigned 310 as NPA). We used it to access ANAC (forgot what acronym meaning but...) , this accessed an account system that told us the telephone number we were dialing from to identify lines. There was a different number xxxx assigned for each switch or NXX which was NNX at that time. In 1991 or 1992, they changed the 310 to another number for this feature because ... 2) Bell wanted to use the 310 (NXX) with its limitation (local intra switch) to launch a 7 digit 800 access number. Meaning for example, lets say that a BIG Company wanted to publish a unique 7 digit number across the Province for it's Customer Service, they would have one 310-xxxx from anytown and be answered in Montreal for instance. The big hopes for this service came with the massive restructuring and rationalising and re-engineering ... and the company still wanted the little people to believe that no centralizing had occurred. The idea never really took off! Some really good applications could have been exploited though. But let's remember that I am not referring to the NPA 310 (Calif) but a special reserved NXX code available to all Telco switches. Now Only the local calling area of the 310 NPA cannot use this switch feature. Annick Lemonnier Videotron Telecom annick.lemonnier@vtl.videotron.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:13:08 -0500 From: Chris Middings Subject: Press Release: Magazine Advertisement Research Study Thank you for covering our last research study. I thought our latest might interest you as well. Response Marketing Group 200 Church Street P.O. Box 1049 Burlington, VT 05402-1049 (802) 865-6010 Fax (802) 860-0395 www.800response.com FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE MARCH 16, 1999 Contact: Chris Middings, 802-860-7830 e-mail: cmiddings@800response.com web site: www.800response.com TOLL-FREE NUMBERS USED IN 58% OF MAGAZINE ADS WEB ADDRESSES ALSO USED IN 58%, STUDY FINDS (Burlington, VT) Fifty-eight percent of magazine advertisements contain a toll-free number, with 82% using the 800 prefix, according to a new Response Marketing Group study of magazine advertising. A sign of Internet popularity, 58% of magazine advertisements also contain an Internet address. Overall, 78% of advertisements feature either a toll-free number or an Internet address, or both, and 82% of magazine ads use some form of direct response. "Magazine advertisers know the value of direct response," said Sandra Murray, President of Response. "Consumers may be ready to learn more or to buy immediately after seeing an ad. Without a direct response mechanism, they have no way of acting on their impulse." Thirty-four percent of advertisements with toll-free numbers display the number prominently, the study found. Only 15% with Internet addresses display the address prominently. "URLs in magazine ads are clearly secondary response mechanisms," continued Murray. "Toll-free numbers are still the response device of choice." The flood of 888 and 877 numbers has had little impact on magazine advertisements. "Consumers have had 30 years to get familiar with 800," Murray explained. "They've only been exposed to 888 for the last two years -- advertisers see this as a big risk. They can't afford to gamble on consumers misdialing their phone numbers." Industries using toll-free numbers in ads most often are home improvement, attorneys, lodging, and sports. Ads in sports, automotive, and computer magazines contain toll-free numbers most frequently. Toll-free numbers are found most often in 6 and 7+ page ads, the study found. Industries using Internet addresses in ads most often are real estate, water, delivery service, and computers. Ads in computer, news, and financial magazines contain Internet addresses most frequently. Internet addresses are found most often in 7+ and 5 page ads, the study found. After toll-free numbers and Internet addresses, the next most frequently used response mechanism is a street address, found in 17% of ads. E-mail addresses are found in only 4% of ads. Coupons are found in 1% of ads. The Response study, Toll-free Numbers in Magazine Advertising, analyzed over 4,000 advertisements. A similar study, Toll-free Numbers in Television Advertising, released in September 1998, found 24% of television commercials containing a toll-free number, and 19% containing an Internet address. Both studies are available for online viewing at www.800response.com. Response Marketing Group has been providing interactive marketing and telecommunications services since 1990. The principals of Response have over 30 years experience in the industry and are continually developing innovative ways for businesses to market their products and services. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 08:33:16 -0800 From: VanTek Communications Subject: Discount Long Distance Digest Update Vol. 3, Number 1 DISCOUNT LONG DISTANCE DIGEST UPDATE VOLUME 3 - #1 MARCH 12, 1999 DISCOUNT LONG DISTANCE DIGEST is an internet based newsletter which covers the long distance industry. The Digest's purpose is to provide industry information on long distance resell- ers, carriers, aggregators, wholesalers, their agents, and others involved in the business of selling long distance telephone services for profit. Subscriptions to this mailing list are available for free via e-mail. Subscription information is available below. PUBLISHER: VANTEK COMMUNICATIONS 791 Eighth Street, Suite "M" Arcata, California 95521-6234 USA PHONE: 1.707.826-8446; FAX: 1.707.826.8449 CONTACT: e-mail: postmaster@thedigest.com EDITOR: William Van Hefner SUBSCRIPTIONS: E-Mail Subscription info available at: http://www.thedigest.com/dldsubs.html VIA THE WEB: Discount Long Distance Digest is updated daily via our website at: http://www.thedigest.com/current/ FROM THE EDITOR It has been a LONG time since we sent out an e-mail to everyone on this mailing list. It has probably been over six months since we sent out the last update. Our updates should be sent out on roughly a monthly basis from now on, if not more often. We hope you enjoy the re-activation of the mailing list. There are many exciting changes going on at The Digest. As you may have noticed, we have completely re-vamped the layout of our pages. Many of the design improvements came at the request of our readers. We hope that you enjoy them. Below is a list of announcements about changes at The Digest. All are for the better. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to drop me a note via e-mail, or post them on our discussion forum. Info on the forum is listed below. William Van Hefner Publisher Discount Long Distance Digest CHANGES AT THE DIGEST We should probably label this section "improvements", since all changes we are making are for the better. 1. NEW! MORE EDITORIAL CONTENT Tired of reading the same old press releases? Do you ever wonder how the news really affects YOU? Reader feedback told us that more editorial content was needed in our publication. We are proud to announce that every new story posted in The Digest now contains an Editorial Follow- Up section. Written by myself, our editorials give you the inside scoop behind the press releases, give you inside info on the companies mentioned, add additional insight and basically "tell it like it is". You will now find our "no punches pulled" editorials on each and every story. 2. NEW! MEET THE EDITOR IN LAS VEGAS! Please plan to attend the AgENt Trade Fair next month in Las Vegas, NV. I will be a featured speaker, along with many other leaders in the long distance industry. I will be giving out free copies of our new CD ROM compilation, which includes all back issues of The Digest in a searchable format. There will be a lot of great guest speakers, deals being made, roundtable discussions and a whole lot of fun! Check out the latest itinerary for the show at http://www.thedigest.com/tagshow.html . 3. NEW! THE VANCAM! Meet the Editor of Discount Long Distance Digest via the VanCam, with real-time chat. I will be holding regular conferences with readers on at least a weekly basis. The next chat session will be broadcast live this Monday, March 15, 1999 at 1 p.m. PST (4 p.m. EST). You only need a standard internet connection with a Java compatible browser (Netscape or MSIE ver. 4.0+) in order to view the VanCam and join in the chat. Check out the VanCam Homepage at http://www.bulletinboard.net/webcam/ for a schedule of upcoming conferences and events. 4. NEW! INDUSTRY DIRECTORY! We will be publishing a directory of long distance carriers, resellers and master agencies. This directory will be available for FREE to readers via the Web. We are still in the process of compiling listings for the directory, which we hope to have finished by the time of the AgENt Trade Fair next month. If you are a long distance carrier, reseller or master agency, please fill-out our survey at http://www.thedigest.com/survey.html to have your listing included for FREE. 5. NEW! SITE REDESIGN! We changed the layout of The Digest about a month ago. This should help our pages load faster, and look better than our previous format. We have also added a navigation bar on the top of each page for your convenience. Everytime you click onto a new article, a new browser window will open. This will allow you to get back to the Current Issue Page without having to hit the "back" button, and wait for the page to reload all over again. Simply close the new browser window (article) when you are finished to view the previous page. 6. NEW! FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS! In the next 1-2 months, we will make several major announcements. We will be moving The Digest to its own newer, faster, dedicated server. This will speed-up the site even more. We will also soon announce that articles will be added to the Current Issue Page every single day. This will be a major improvement, and you will never again have to wonder if there is "anything new" in The Digest. We will also soon announce a joint venture with another publisher to give you even MORE news about the long distance industry on a weekly basis. The completely new site will contain articles written by myself on long distance consumer issues. REMINDER! Be sure to visit our interactive discussion forum at http://www.bulletinboard.net/thedigest/ . The forum includes lots of info on the long distance industry, as well as lots of discussion on long distance topics. We wish to give a BIG THANKS to all of the advertisers who have supported us over the past few years. Some of them have been with us nearly since we started. Several new ones have come onboard in the last few months. We would greatly appreciate it if you would take a few moments to go through our site and request information from any of our advertisers which might have appropriate products or services for your needs. Offers from these advertisers are changing constantly, so you may want to take a second look at some of them. Thanks so much for your support. We have received a lot of great feedback from our readers, which we will be using to improve our site. We will be making several new announcements of site improvements over the next 1-2 months. These wouldn't be possible without your support. We hope that you enjoy the improvements that we are making, and will let us know if there are any other areas where we could use improvement. We really do value suggestions from our readers. William Van Hefner Publisher Discount Long Distance Digest http://www.thedigest.com e-mail: postmaster@thedigest.com All contents copyright 1999 by VanTek Communications ------------------------------ From: Jamie Falkosky Subject: Question About Calling Cards Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 11:32:23 -0500 Hi Patrick, I work for Cable & Wireless PLC - Global Card Services. I am in the middle of a research project regarding calling cards ... postpaid. I would like to find information regarding the size of the global calling card market, maturity level and the market shares. Do you know of any information that is available? I came across your website in my research and I think that it is an AWESOME sight, very well organized and informative. I also like the idea of the chat room. I have scanned approximatly 200 website in the last few days and I have spent the most time in yours. Any help or ideas on how to retrieve the info that I requested would be very much appreciated. Thanks, Jamie J. Falkosky Phone:+1-703-287-6114 FAX: +1-703-287-6288 Global Card Services Jamie.Falkosky@cwusa.com [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Readers with some background on this topic should contact the writer directly please. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 15:38:51 +1100 From: Stewart Fist Reply-To: fist@ozemail.com.au Organization: Independent writer and columnist Subject: Iridium and Orbcomm Does anyone have any experience with Iridium, either the phones or the pager, national or international. I'm interested in both the beta trial and the more recent commercial operation. I'm also seeking some information about Orbcomm -- actual experience using it for messaging, if possible. Stewart Fist - writer and columnist, The Australian newspaper. See http://technology.news.com.au/opinion/ http://www.abc.net.au/http/sfist/ (some archives) http://www.electric-words.com (main archives) 70 Middle Harbour Road, Lindfield, 2070, N.S.W, Australia Phone +61 2 9416 7458 Fax +61 2 9416 4582 ------------------------------ From: steve@dgii.com (Steve Wahl) Subject: Local Call Dialing Question Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 13:10:21 CST Pat, I used to read the TELECOM Digest fairly faithfully via Usenet News in the late 80's / early 90's, but have fallen off the bandwagon in the last 5 years or so. I have a question that I don't want to bother the list with if it's a FAQ, yet I can't seem to think of the right keywords to search the archives for answers on this, either. The question is: If my phone number is 612-912-3236, why can't I pick up a local phone and dial 1-612-912-3236 and get that call placed, as a local call, to my phone number? Instead, if the call is local, in the same area code, the switch seems to insist that I need to shorten it to 912-3236. (I admit I haven't checked this very recently; have they changed it?). At least three of the ramifications this has are: When travelling, I need to change the number my laptop computer dials to reach the modem I want. When I take my cell phone out of the local area, none of the memory locations will dial correctly, because the numbers stored don't have the area code included. The "call the caller back" function on my caller ID boxes needs to know what area code I'm in (and I've lost the instructions on how to program it on one of them). As far as I know, the answer is "it's always been that way," or "earlier systems would have tied up a long distance trunk for such a call," like dialing 9 on a PBX to get out and then dialing an outside number that gets back into the PBX. Is there some other reason they don't allow this? Thanks for your time; I know you're a busy man. Steve Wahl, Digi International (612) 912-3236 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #35 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 17 16:02:14 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id QAA13164; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 16:02:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 16:02:14 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903172102.QAA13164@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #36 TELECOM Digest Wed, 17 Mar 99 16:02:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 36 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Online Privacy: Can Industry Police Itself? (Monty Solomon) AOL, Others May Not Back U.S. Privacy Plans (Monty Solomon) Microsoft Privacy and Security Issues (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "Telecommunications Directory", Ellen Pare (Rob Slade) Book Review: "D&B/Gale Reference Handbooks: Telecommunications" (Rob Slade) KSU-less System Recommendations (Toby Nixon) Voice Mail Services (Fred Atkinson) Re: 311-KLondike 5-xxxx ; SAC 310 ; TWX (Carl Moore) "No Solicitation" Residential Phone Feature (Pat Noziska) What is the Number For 1000 cps Test Tone? (Stan Buskus) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 13:05:58 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Online Privacy: Can Industry Police Itself? http://thestandard.net/articles/mediagrok_display/0,1185,3858,00.html Online Privacy: Can Industry Police Itself? When you fill out a registration or order form online and hit "submit," just where does your personal info go? We'd all like to believe Web sites will stick to their privacy policies, but they also often tout their membership lists as one of their most valuable assets. The sorry state of online privacy was highlighted last year by the U.S. Commerce Department, and in response the industry swore it would clean up its act without regulation. First, came the nonprofit Trust-e program, in which companies sponsor the group giving seals of approval to sites that post a policy and follow it. Now, comes the expected announcement of a "seal of approval" from the new Better Business Bureau subsidiary, BBBOnLine, which will try to mediate consumer complaints and refer egregious cases to the FTC for enforcement. The Washington Post's Robert O'Harrow Jr. said the BBBOnLine seal would cost from $150 to $3,000 per year, depending on sales, and that Dell was expected to post a seal on its site today. O'Harrow said privacy advocates weren't sold on whether the department could hold companies accountable for their actions, though they were optimistic about its past reputation and its strong name recognition with the general public. The San Jose Mercury News' Stephen Buel said the new seal might help in U.S. negotiations with the European Union, which has higher privacy standards. Buel points out the similarities between the BBB seal and Trust-e's, but says the bureau thinks its rigorous approach is a "major step forward." Though the department won't impose financial penalties, bureau counsel Steve Cole thinks businesses won't risk having their seal taken away. While other outlets were studying the theories behind the new BBBOnLine seal, Wired News' Chris Oakes was looking at the practice of one sticky self-policing action at Trust-e: investigating Microsoft. Trust-e is conducting a preliminary investigation of the software giant on reports that Windows 98 registration creates ID numbers for each user that can be tracked at Microsoft sites. The big conflict? Microsoft is a major sponsor of Trust-e, paying $100,000 per year in cash and software. The investigation could result in an audit, or might bring nothing, but privacy advocates are watching keenly. "This is a real test of whether the industry can police itself," said Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. And Jason Catlett of Junkbusters added: "I'm not convinced that any seal organization will have much leverage with Microsoft. Remember that the gorilla is paying the zookeeper here." Indeed. Better Business Bureaus Offer Online Privacy Seal http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-03/17/002r-031799-idx.html BBB to Help Guard Privacy on Internet http://www.mercurycenter.com/business/top/021757.htm Trust-e's Test: Going After MS http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/18476.html?wnpg=2 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 04:01:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: AOL, Others May Not Back U.S. Privacy Plans By Bloomberg News Special to CNET News.com March 16, 1999, 5:55 a.m. PT America Online, Walt Disney, and other companies won't endorse a U.S. Commerce Department plan to bring U.S. companies in line with European Union privacy rules, according to reports. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,33803,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 03:52:35 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Privacy and Security Issues MacFixIt ... Microsoft letters to customers regarding privacy issue and Office Microsoft has posted a couple of letters to customers (see a and b) regarding the privacy issue and GUID numbers in Microsoft Office. In addition John Birnhak sent us a copy of a somewhat different letter he received from Microsoft on this matter. Essentially, Microsoft asserts that the problems is not as serious as some have suggested: "We want to assure you that your privacy is not at all compromised by the existence of unique identifier numbers in Office. The unique identifier generated for Office 97 documents contains information that is derived in part from a network card, not from an individual user's identity, and thus it is not possible to reliably determine the author of a document." None-the-less they will soon be issuing patches to remove these numbers. However, as of now, the listed patches are only for Office 97 for Windows. In addition, Microsoft has determined that the forthcoming release of Office 2000 will not include the ability to insert these numbers in documents. http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/1999/03-08custletter.htm http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/1999/03-08custletter2.htm http://www.macfixit.com/archives/march.99.b.shtml#privacy-03-15 ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 06:56:11 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Telecommunications Directory", Ellen Pare Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKTELDIR.RVW 990205 "Telecommunications Directory", Ellen Pare, 1999, 0-7876-2135-8, U$400.00 %E Ellen Pare ellen.pare@gale.com %C 27500 Drake Road, Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 %D 1999 %G 0-7876-2135-8 %I The Gale Group %O U$400.00 800-877-4253 fax: 248-699-8061 Cheryl.McDonald@gale.com %P 1237 p. %S Industry Reference Handbooks %T "Telecommunications Directory Tenth Edition, 1999" Sticking closely to traditional ideas of telecommunications, this volume lists organizations in the fields of audiotex, cellular communications, electronic mail, facsimile, Internet access provision, local area networks, local exchange carriers, microwave networks, personal communications services, satellite services, shared-tenant services, teleconferencing, telegram and telex, transactional services, videotex and teletext, voice and data communications, and voicemail or voice processing. The descriptive listings cover 700 pages, with contact information, brief organizational data, and description. There may also be subordinate product listings. The indices are almost as long as the listings themselves, and there are four: by function or service, geographic, personal names, and master name and keyword. Based on self-report, the listings can be only as good as the information provided. I noticed missing entries almost immediately: even such entities as the Internet Engineering Task Force and W3 are missing. When I came to the British Columbia section of the geographic index was startled at how very few of the telecommunications related companies and institutions in the area were represented. My former long distance carrier is not listed, nor is UBC, nor is SFU, nor is Vancouver CommunityNet. Victoria TelecommunityNet is there, along with the various entities Gary Shearman has spun off over the years. Well, he deserves the exposure. The listings themselves are generally good, although I notice that there is some variation in what counts as a separate product: Telemanagement magazine is buried in the listing for Angus Telemanagement. There is a short glossary included. Unfortunately, this is hardly worth being described as such. An enormous number of important new technologies are completely missing. The definitions given are short, barely explanatory, and frequently wrong. (ATM packets are 48 bytes of data *plus* the five byte header, for a total of 53. Yes, there is a listing for "virus," and it is wrong.) For all its flaws, this volume does provide a valuable resource to those in the telecommunications industry. While not exhaustive, or even really complete, it does provide a starting point for contacts in a variety of areas of telecommunications work in a variety of geographic locations. (Unlike the "Industry Reference Handbook: Telecommunications" [cf. BKIRHTLC.RVW] this volume does have entries from around the world.) The descriptions are fairly complete, and the contact information supplies not only addresses and telephone numbers, but names, email, and even Web sites. From which you can probably link to all the missing outfits. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKTELDIR.RVW 990205 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com First we thought the PC was a calculator. Then we found how to turn numbers into letters with ASCII -- and we thought it was a typewriter. Then we discovered graphics, and we thought it was a television. With the World Wide Web, we've realized it's a brochure. --Douglas Adams http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:38:37 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "D&B/Gale Reference Handbooks: Telecommunications" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKIRHTLC.RVW 990205 "D&B/Gale Reference Handbooks: Telecommunications", Stacy A. McConnell/Linda D. Hall, 1998, 0-7876-3005-5, U$99.00 %E Stacy A. McConnell %E Linda D. Hall %C 27500 Drake Road, Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3535 %D 1998 %G 0-7876-3005-5 %I The Gale Group %O U$99.00 800-877-4253 fax: 248-699-8061 Cheryl_McDonald@gale.com %P 893 p. %S Industry Reference Handbooks %T "D&B/Gale Reference Handbooks: Telecommunications" Telecommunications, for the purposes of this reference, covers eighteen Standard Industry Classifications (SICs). (The newer North American Industry Classification System codes are not used due to business inertia, but a conversion table is provided.) This casts a somewhat wider net than some might suppose, including radio and television broadcasting and movie production. As one might assume from the classification system, the content is based on US activity, although international enterprises have a bearing both on technical and business aspects. Chapter one is a general overview, looking at history, a terse set of only four biographies of "pioneers," projections for various technologies, and a quick review of industry leading companies. Chapter two gives snapshot business statistics by industry category, while three presents financial norms and ratios. The largest section is chapter four, a company directory. The companies listed are then ranked by sales and then employment in chapter five. Chapter six looks at mergers and acquisitions, which are fast and furious in the telecom sector. The choice of associations, in chapter seven, is rather odd. While all of the companies listed earlier are American, the groups come from all over. In addition, there seems to be a very high proportion of outfits like the "Hogan's Heros Fan Club." The list of consultants seems to be limited to the US and Canada in chapter eight. Entitled "Trade Information Sources," chapter nine comprises periodicals of various types with some listing of associations, and even a few books. There is no distinction between these types, so entries must be read carefully for clues. Chapter ten lists trade shows, but not completely. As one example, of the Comdex "family" of shows, only Comdex/Egypt and Comdex/Rio are listed. An extensive index is followed by the SIC/NAICS-NAICS/SIC conversion guide. While one can sympathize with the desire to keep this work within manageable limits, the exclusion of non-US companies is regrettable, especially considering the international nature of telecommunications today. Much of the material is based on self-reporting, and therefore you won't find any surprises within. At times there are obvious gaps, while in other places there are equally glaring duplications. Still, for those deeply involved in the business side of telecommunications this work has a great deal of value. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKIRHTLC.RVW 990205 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com If you can tell good advice from bad advice, you don't *need* any advice http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: KSU-less System Recommendations Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:38:52 -0800 Now that the kids are getting to be teenagers, I'm looking to expand our phone system at home. Not wanting to tear open the walls to put in new wiring, I'm considering either a KSU-less system (like Nortel Venture, AT&T, or TMC) or wireless system like the Siemens Gigaset. I'm looking for something that will support at least two lines, at least 8 extensions (preferably 10 or 12), Caller ID (on all stations), all-station paging, station-to-station intercom, hold, and call waiting. It doesn't have to support voicemail, since we us CO-based voicemail, but does need to allow connection of fax machines, and we do have a remotely-monitored alarm system tied into the primary line on an RJ-31X. I'm a little wary of using the 2.4 GHz wireless system because we already use a wireless LAN in the house (Proxim Symphony) and I'm a little concerned about interference. Does anyone have any recommendations or advice? Know of any reviews of products on the market, especially good comparison tables? Thanks! Toby L. Nixon Senior Program Manager, Windows Networking and Communications Microsoft Corporation, One Microsoft Way, Redmond WA 98052 USA +1 425 936-2792 Fax: +1 425 936-7329 Cell: +1 206 790-6377 Text pager: 2067906377@mobile.att.net (150-char maximum) ------------------------------ From: Fred Atkinson Subject: Voice Mail Services Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 16:01:03 -0500 Pat, I am trying to find a voice mail service to use. I can't use the local Bell Atlantic voice mail because I have multiple phone numbers (including my cellular telephone) that must forward to the voice mail box. I've spoken with Bell Atlantic and they absolutely insist that this can't be done. I went with one that I thought was a local company. When the bill arrived, it turned out that their main office was in California. Additionally, the representative had told me that the $34.90 he quoted me included turnup and two months of service. Thereafter, I was to pay $9.95 plus taxes for the service. This occurred about a month ago. Shortly afterwards, I got a bill showing I had a balance due of $7.72. I called the gentleman who sold me the service. He asked me to fax him the bill so he could review it. And he didn't get back to me. I left several messages on his voice mail but he did not return my call. Finally, today I reached him by telephone. He asked me to 'refresh his memory' about what he was supposed to get back to me about. I was quite angry since I'd been leaving him messages for two weeks and he hadn't made any attempt to follow up on it. Now, he says I should be speaking to 'Customer Service' (why didn't he tell me this up front?). He had a supervisor call me. Now, the billing story changes. The amount did not pay for two months of service, it paid for partial service for one month and the other 'month' was a deposit that they would hold. And, I did owe the additional $7.72. I pointed out that this was completely contrary to what I was told when he signed me up. She 'apologized' and said she was going to contact his manager for misrepresenting the service. But, she made no adjustment except to cancel the '$0.12' late charge on the '$7.72' because I had been put off on my answer to my inquiry. And that would pay me to the March (she wanted me to add the 'April' payment to that amount so I'd be paid until the end of April). Additionally, there is a monthly $1.00 charge for telephone company services (I was not told about this when I signed up). I realize that this is not a lot of money, but it is clear that I cannot trust anything that these folks say. So, I plan to cancel as quickly as I can locate another voicemail company. I'd appreciate any feedback about how to screen voice mail companies. I'm not looking for anything fancy. I just want a local number that answers with my voice and records messages that I can recover later. And, I want a good price for the service, of course. Suggestions anyone? Fred [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well first of all, unless your telco is using some kind of voice mail entirely different than that which all the other mainstream telcos are using, you *can* have more than one line attached to the same box. Ameritech did it for me when I was helping the guy with the bus station in Skokie. The voicemail was associated with one line, and the other line was 'aliased' to it. They even offered to 'alias' a third number there to the same voice mail if I wanted it. Same box, same greeting message regardless of what number was dialed. We did find, after some experimentation, that there was an incompatibility where 'circular hunt' was concerned. With 'straight line hunt' where all the numbers hunt to some final number in the group, voice mail is put on that back line, and as calls roll forward they eventually hit that line if everything else in between is busy, or any single number goes unanswered for a certain number of rings. If each number is independent with no hunting on busy, then each is 'aliased' to whatever number the voice mail is actually on. When calling in for messages or to change the greeting, etc, you may possibly have to identify yourself as one number, regardless of where calling from, etc. Whatever you do, do *not* let them sell you several instantiations of voice mail, i.e. one for each line. It is not needed! If you need more than one box to hold messages, get the feature where you can have up to four boxes total which you create and administer yourself. Any voice mail service you get, whether from telco or some other vendor is going to have that dollar or two dollar per month 'telephone company' charge for the 'transfer on busy/no answer' feature which pushes the calls to voice mail and the feature which sends back audible or visual message waiting signals. If, as you say, you 'do not need anything fancy' then wouldn't an answering machine work as well? You can get answering machines with multi-line capability; I think even Radio Shack has one. Or, why not voice mail software for a computer you don't use regularly? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 10:50:48 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: 311-KLondike 5-xxxx ; SAC 310 ; TWX Mark J Cuccia writes: > In 1993, 810 took effect in "northern" MI, in the split of NPA 313. What do you mean by "northern" MI? If you don't even consider the Upper Peninsula, you still have 517 and 616 extending further north than old 313 did. (616 is soon to split.) ------------------------------ From: Pat Noziska Subject: "No Solicitation" Residential Phone Feature Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 10:36:04 -0800 Organization: aracnet.com In the Portland, OR, area, USWest is promoting a new service called "No Solicitation," wherein telemarketers who call subscribers signed up for this feature would get a recording saying "You have reached a number which does not accept solicitations ... etc etc ". Two questions: 1) How (if at all), from a technical standpoint, does this feature differ from Anonymous Call Blocking for Caller ID subscribers? 2) If if does differ, how does the CO distinguigh between actual telemarketers/solicitors and other types of "Out-of-area" calls, as one might get from a friend calling from a hotel suite or your spouse calling behind an old PBX at work? How is that information transmitted through the PSTN? ------------------------------ From: Stan Buskus Subject: What is the Number For 1000 cps Test Tone? Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 04:25:29 +0000 Organization: AE Business Reply-To: sbuskus@chorus.net Hi everyone, I want to test a POTS line for noise and db levels. A long time ago, each CO had it's own test tone generator and quiet line termination. All one had to do was dial XXX-9994 and XXX-9995 (or something like that). I called Ameritech to get the test numbers but I was told it was propietary. Does anyone know what numbers they use for testing? Thanks, Stan Buskus Ting-a-ling! Ting-a-ling! - Kilgore Trout ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #36 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Mar 17 18:36:23 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA21663; Wed, 17 Mar 1999 18:36:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 18:36:23 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903172336.SAA21663@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #37 TELECOM Digest Wed, 17 Mar 99 18:36:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 37 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Local Call Dialing Question (Mark J. Cuccia) Re: Canadian Telco's Use of 310 Code (Mark J. Cuccia) Microsoft Passport Piques Privacy Concerns (Monty Solomon) Win 98 Privacy Issue: Worse Than You Thought (Monty Solomon) Phone Companies Harassing Each Other (Wm. Randolph Franklin) Re: CPUC Staff Recommends OVERLAYS for 415, 510 (William H. Bowen) Re: History Wanted on 999 System (Andrew Emmerson) Re: History Wanted on 999 System (Thomas Miles) Last Laugh! Re: German Hotel Fees (Wm. Randolph Franklin) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 14:04:32 -0600 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Local Call Dialing Question Steve: I read your post to TELECOM Digest regarding local dialing issues. I'd like to change the subject line to: "Local vs. Toll, Home/Same-NPA vs. Different-NPA, 7d vs. 10d, 1+ vs. lack of 1+, etc." But that would be too long for Pat! :-}))) In some areas, local calls within the same area code (NPA) _CAN_ be dialed as 1+NPA-NXX-xxxx, AND NOT billed as toll! In some areas with overlaid new NPA's (or soon to be such, such as the 310 area code in Southern CA to soon be overlaid with new NPA 424, or in the 212 area code for Manhattan soon to be overlaid with new NPA 646, etc), the way the dialing procedures have been for som time is to dial 7-digits for "same" NPA REGARDLESS of local or toll status of the dialed NPA-NXX- w/r/t the calling NPA-NXX, and 1+ten-digits for "different" NPA REGARDLESS of local vs. toll status. With the introduction of new OVERLAY NPA's and the already "grand mess" of numbering/code assignments and conflicts in the affected region, _ALL_ calls within North America (except for calls to N11 codes, or 0- for the operator, REGARDLESS of local vs. toll, same NPA vs. different NPA, etc. will _HAVE_ to be dialed (at least for some interim) as _1+_ _TEN_ digits. Some areas allow one to place local calls as 7-digits or optionally as 10-digits, some even optionally as 1+ten-digits. Sometimes, 7-digit local dialing is "protected" in "communities-of-interest" which straddle state or area-code boundaries, particularly where there are smaller towns or rural areas which cross a state-line but have local dialing. Here in the New Orleans area, I subscribe to BellSouth's "Area Plus" Plan, an optional extended unlimited dialing plan, which allows me, for a fixed monthly fee, to dial ANYWHERE in my "LATA", UNLIMITED. There are _NO_ per-call charges, _NO_ per-mile charges, _NO_ per-minute charges. The "basic" local calls (which everyone gets) can _ONLY_ be dialed as "straight" seven-digits (except from some "DMS-100" served exchanges which can optionally dial 504+seven-digits or 1+504-seven-digits for calls to points within the same switch; and of course, cellular phones have all kinds of optional dialing of ten-digits, 1+ten-digits, etc., since the "SEND" key 'consolidates' the dialed number taking away all ambiguities). Calls to points in my LATA which are part of a smaller "tier" called "Local Optional Service" (LOS) can also _ONLY_ be dialed as "straight" seven-digits. But those with "basic" local-only service _MUST_ dial these calls as 1+504+seven-digits. And finally, calls to points in my LATA which are not part of the smaller "tier" of LOS but still fall within _MY_ Area Plus plan _MUST_ be dialed as 1+504+seven-digits (or for Crossroads MS which is in my LATA, thus part of the unlimited Area Plus plan that I'm on, _MUST_ be dialed as 1+601+772-xxxx). However, as long as I do _NOT_ dial some other carrier's 101-XXXX+ code first, thus I allow BellSouth to pick up the handling of the call, the call is "free". It doesn't even itemize on my bill as a $0.00 rated call! But I still have to place calls to those points as 1+504+nxx-xxxx. Eventually, we are all hoping that the dialing procedures in the NANP will be uniform. However, there are all kinds of opinions and disagreements on what a uniform dial plan is. I want the "toll alerting" (if we still have 'toll' as we know it today when a uniform dial plan is ever adopted) to REQUIRE a MANDATORY 1+ placed before the ten-digit NANP-based number that happens to carry some form of toll charge, or charge above a pre-set price-threshold. Others don't want _ANY_ form of "toll alerting". Still others want it to be an audible tone or announcement. The third option has DRAWBACKS (and I HOPE that the INDUSTRY NUMBERING COMMITTEE ATTENDEES, PARTICULARLY MCI with their good BUT SLIGHTLY FLAWED NANP EXPANSION PLAN IS READING THIS)... WHAT about non-English speaking customers? WHAT about deaf customers using TTY/TDD devices? WHAT about ELDERLY people and SMALL CHILDREN? NO, the TOLL ALERTING MUST be part of the dialing. Ten-digit dialing WILL become the de-facto standard throughout most of the US and Canada over the next five-to-ten years. So, if one dials "straight" ten-digits, that call should complete ONLY if "local" or "free" (i.e., including 800/888/877/866/855/etc. free), and any 'charged' local call which falls below a certain cost threshold. And if one dials 1+ ten-digits, THAT call should ALWAYS complete, and if "local/free", then "billed" (if such) as "local/free"... if toll, then bill the applicable toll rates according to the PRIMARY carrier chosen to route to that dialed NPA-NXX- at the rates for that time/day/ holiday/etc. or discount plan. i.e., toll calling would REQUIRE a 1+ before the dialed ten-digits. Of course, if it ever happens (and most of us hope it will eventually) that ALL CALLS within the NANP (except for to 976, 900, etc) ever become FREE AND UNLIMITED/UNTIMED/UNMEASURED/UNMETERED, then ALL such NANP calls could be dialed as "straight" ten-digits! Telephone service, IMO, should evolve rate-wise to the point the way email and web-surfing has! MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 14:39:28 -0600 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Re: Canadian Telco's Use of 310 Code Annick: I read your post in TELECOM Digest regarding 310 in (Bell) Canada. You mention ANAC - I think it stands for "Automatic Number Announcement Circuit". I'd heard from my friends in Ontario that 310-xxxx could be used at times years ago for "ringback", ANAC, testboard, and other testing functions. And yes, I know that today, throughout most/all of Canada, the SEVEN digit number 310-xxxx (sort-of-as-if the 310 "c.o.code" were assigned or reserved in EVERY Canadian area code) is for "single-access-number" service (usually for free from within that province) to things like Telco Business Office / Repair Service (310-BELL), or Pizza Hut for phone orders, etc. On this side of the border, in BellSouth, we use 557-xxxx (in the five states of former South Central Bell) and 780-xxxx (in the four states of former Southern Bell) to reach Telco Business Office and Repair, etc.... and we are using in all BellSouth the 203-xxxx number for (usually non-telco-related companies) "single-access-number" functions. It might cost coins at a payphone, but it doesn't carry a toll charge to call 203-xxxx to order a Pizza (I don't know if anyone is yet really promoting their wares with 203-xxxx, but it IS available from BellSouth). There is also the 950-xxxx access (traditionally for Long Distance Carrier "card" access, similar to 800- access numbers such as 800-CALL-ATT, or Canada's 800-555-1111) which is now supposedly available to Pizza Hut, Dominos Pizza, etc. Many credit-card validation systems nationwide dial a particular seven-digit 950-xxxx number to access the database ... But for 310 as a "special" AREA code ... in the later 1960's, and in the 1970's, AT&T had "reserved" the 310 Special Area Code for something "special" probably Data or TWX related. Other than what I know that it was "reserved" for "something" data/TWX related, I have no further concrete details. Western Union did begin using 310+ from US TWX machines in the 1980's, but AFTER US TWX had been "removed" from the AT&T/Bell DDD TELEPHONE network. WUTCO used it for TWX customers to place "terminal-to-terminal" teletype calls to domestic but non-WUTCO _TELEX_ customers -- i.e. calls from WUTCO (US)TWX _to_ (US) Telex subscribers of the domestic _competitive_telex_ networks of: ITT, RCA/GE, TRT, WUI/MCI, Graphnet, FTCC, etc. The WUTCO (US) TWX customer would dial/touchtone on their TWX machine's dial or keypad the 310 followed by the non-WUTCO US Telex customer's number (of varying digit length). But this really had _NOTHING_ to do with numbering/dialing/routing on the "telephone" network, except that (US) TWX _had_ been part of the DDD Telephone Network in the 1960's/70's and that the numericals '310' for a "special area code" were 'reserved' for something 'special' related to TWX or Data back then as well! MARK_J._CUCCIA__PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE:__HOME:__(USA)__Tel:_CHestnut-1-2497 WORK:__mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu|4710-Wright-Road|__(+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity-5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New-Orleans-28__|fwds-on-no-answr-to Fax:UNiversity-5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail- ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Passport Piques Privacy Concerns Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 12:13:12 -0500 By Mo Krochmal, TechWeb Mar 12, 1999 (1:40 PM) Microsoft is readying a service that will make it easier for consumers to provide information for online shopping -- and some privacy advocates are concerned. The Redmond, Wash., software company last week announced new e-commerce initiatives including Passport, an electronic wallet. http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19990312S0022 ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Win 98 Privacy Issue: Worse Than You Thought Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 18:11:14 -0500 By David Methvin, Windows Mar 12, 1999 (9:20 AM) A Windows Magazine investigation has shown the recently reported privacy concern with Microsoft's Windows 98 Registration Wizard goes much deeper than previously reported. It's not only possible for any website to read information that uniquely identifies you and your PC, but that information can be modified and/or sent to Microsoft without your consent.Last week, Richard Smith of Phar Lap Software first identified a risk with the Registration Wizard, or RegWiz. (The Phar Lap discussion of this problem is at http://security.pharlap.com/regwiz/index.htm). http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19990312S0008 ------------------------------ From: wrf+tele374@mab.ecse.rpi.NOSPAM.edu (Wm. Randolph Franklin) Subject: Phone Companies Harassing Each Other Date: 17 Mar 1999 20:23:09 GMT Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY, USA The {Wall Street Journal} had an article last week on the difficulties that phone companies face when the court allows them to install equipment in other companies' offices. Typical harassment has included not allowing the visiting employees to use the bathroom, except maybe in groups a couple of times a day while paying for the guards to herd them there. Another example, I think by PacBell, was not allowing visiting executives to use the protected parking lot, even tho, when the visitor started to park on the street, someone with a screwdriver immediately walked up to the car. PacBell's response was that the other company was paying to rent space for their switch, not space for their car. This sort of attitude reminds me of when I told NyTel that I wanted to install my own wiring in my house in 1982. NyTel sent someone out to destroy the existing wiring so I couldn't use it. Note that they didn't want the wiring themselves; they cost themselves extra money to prevent me getting a small freebee that wouldn't have cost them anything to give. In any case, I was nice to the repairman, so he left it in long pieces that I reinstalled. Nevertheless, there are good reasons for some people not to particularly like certain large companies. Wm. Randolph U Franklin, wrf+tele374 at MAB.ECSE.RPI.DELETETHIS.EDU ------------------------------ From: bowenb@best.com (William H. Bowen) Subject: Re: CPUC Staff Recommends OVERLAYS for 415, 510 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 04:40:52 GMT Reply-To: bowenb@best.com Linc, I'll have to eat just a bit of crow -- as I know you are aware I used to be totally opposed to overlays, but I'm glad the CPUC went the overlay route for the 415 AC. The reason: with the split orginally proposed, I would have faced a nightmare at work. Guess it is time to bite the bullet ... What I find really weird is that they just split 510 -- why an overlay so quickly? At work we have switches all over SF, all tied together. The existing permissive 1+10D is great for us folks that are mobile: I have all my DUN locations set up for 1+10D and don't have to worry exactly where I am when I use a particular connection. Regards, Bill Bowen bowenb@best.com Daly City, CA ------------------------------ From: midshires@cix.co.uk (Andrew Emmerson) Subject: Re: History Wanted on 999 System Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 13:06 GMT Organization: CIX - Compulink Information eXchange Reply-To: midshires@cix.co.uk > From the latest edition of the Telecomms Heritage Group Journal: 61 YEARS OF 999: THE UK's BEST-KNOWN NUMBER CELEBRATES ITS DIAMOND JUBILEE Whilst 'attempted entry' may seem a relatively low-key offence, failed burglar Thomas Duffy's place in the annals of crime is assured. Spotted trying to break into a house in Hampstead during the early hours of 7th July 1937, the 24-year-old labourer was arrested as a result of the UK's first ever 999 call. ---------------------------------------------------- Housebreaker foiled by telephone call Mr. Stanley Beard of Elsworthy Road, Hampstead, heard a noise outside his house at 4.20 am and, on looking out, saw a man's foot. His wife immediately dialled the new emergency number 999 and asked for the police. Seconds later, radio patrol cars raced to the spot. Four minutes later a man was detained by police near Primrose Hill. Later in the day, Thomas Duffy (24) a labourer, was charged at Marylebone police court with attempting to break in to the house, and was remanded in custody. ----------------------------------------------------- Today, 60 years later, 999 operators handle approaching half-a-million calls a week, connecting members of the public to the appropriate emergency service - - fire, police, ambulance or coastguard - in a matter of seconds. In providing this service, BT helps to save hundreds, if not thousands, of lives every year. The 999 service was first introduced experimentally in London, partially as a result of the deaths of five people in a serious fire in Wimpole Street. At the time, calls to emergency services were given no greater priority than any other call- the operator had no way of knowing 'whether a call was urgent until it was answered. One witness to the fire was still trying to get through as the fire engines arrived. In the event the switchboard had been jammed with other neighbours trying to get through but it nevertheless highlighted the problem and, as a result, a parliamentary committee was set up to design an emergency service system. First preference for an easy-to-remember number was 111 but this was rejected because of the likelihood of false calls being triggered accidentally. This, together with technical issues relating to the need to modify dials at public telephones, led to the decision to go with 999. Implementing the service was a major task. Every subscriber had to be informed of the service, the labels on their telephones had to be changed and special alert systems were installed at operator centres. When a 999 call was made, a lamp would light up at the special operating position, a large red light on top of the position would glow and a klaxon would sound. There was no danger whatsoever of an operator missing an emergency call! Once the service had been rolled out in London, Glasgow was next on the list. The war then intervened, but by 1948, all large towns and cities served by automatic exchanges had the 999 service. In the ensuing years, every telephone in the country was given access to the system. Despite the major change and innovation witnessed over the last 60 years, the reassuring and confident human voice that greeted the caller all those years ago remains the core of the service. The number is known by virtually every member o the British public. It is a recognised and trusted source of help whether the call relates to a major disaster, a suspected incident or a child stuck in railings. So, what does the future hold for 999? Developments in technology have enabled the address of the caller to be displayed on screen - saving valuable seconds that would previously have been spent requesting and keying in details. Although taken for granted these days, this is very much state-of-the-art technology. [Information supplied by BT] ------------------------------ From: Thomas Miles <100412.1241@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: History Wanted on 999 System Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 18:00:33 -0000 Organization: Customer of Planet Online > If memory serves, about three or four years ago TELECOM Digest had a > several messages about the development of an international standard in > Europe for "999" ("911") services; the key number was different in > every country. Many countries changed to a common number. The US and > Canada obviously didn't, and neither did the UK apparently. Actually, the UK has, sort-of. Most European countries use 112 for Emergency -- the UK phone systems will route 112 in the same way as 999, but since 999 is deeply entrenched, and many people in the UK are somewhat Europhobic, 999 is still the widely published number. ------------------------------ From: wrf+tele374@mab.ecse.rpi.NOSPAM.edu (Wm. Randolph Franklin) Subject: Last Laugh! Re: German Hotel Fees Date: 17 Mar 1999 20:23:09 GMT Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY, USA > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Outrageous telephone surcharges in > hotels is a relatively new thing... > Now-days, hotels seem to feel that every square foot of floor space > on the property has to be a profit center for them. I am surprised > they do not charge guests to ride the elevator. PAT] Some do. Ten years ago I was in a moderate hotel in Vienna that charged about ten cents to press the elevator call button in the lobby. However, once the elevator was there, you could ride it up and down indefinitely for no extra charge. That was good since the elevator took only two people, or one person and a suitcase on-end, in one load. It's not just hotels that do this. My employer, a private university, makes the employee parking lots, including indirect expenses thereon, a profit center. The telephones in our labs are treated similarly, making them more expensive than cellphones at times. I joke that we might have to pay for the toilet paper soon. By the way, keep up the history stories; they're really interesting. Wm. Randolph U Franklin, wrf+tele374 at MAB.ECSE.RPI.DELETETHIS.EDU TELECOM Digest Editor's Guffaw: I hope on John Covert's next trip to Germany he manages to avoid that hotel. Speaking of toilet paper however, there was a time many years ago in the United States where most public toilets did require payment for use. Office buildings, shops, transit facilities -- all had 'pay toilets' on their premises for use by members of the public. Many companies had pay toilets for their employees' use. They required inserting a five-cent coin (a 'nickle') in the lock on the door of the stall. The device was called 'Nic-o-lock' and after inserting the coin and turning the knob the door would go open and a small flag on the front of the door would pop up covering the VACANT sign with one saying OCCUPIED. A little notice on the wall said the reason for the collection was to compensate the janitor for his cleaning supplies and efforts as well as the paper. Imagine having a sudden and very urgent need to use the facility and having to hunt through your purse for change, or consult your co-workers trying to get change for a quarter. ... Then the government decided that as a matter of public policy, a needy and indigent person should not be denied the use of a public toilet for lack of money to pay for its use and passed a law saying that in any place where there was a toilet facility for public use, at least one toilet (of I think, every ten thus situated) had to be free. In other words, in a large facility such as a train or bus station with twenty stalls, there had to be two that had no charge. Ten stalls or less required that one be available for free. Typically, the one free stall would be all the way at the end, hard to find, and nearly always occupied for long periods of time. It would always be filthy, seldom have an adequate supply of paper, and as often as not in the conversion of that one stall to 'free' status, the Nic-O-Lock was pulled off with no knob or latch to replace it, meaning the door would not lock, and anyone could peer through the hole where the locking mechanism had been previously. There would never be a hook on which to hang your coat or purse (set them on the floor next to you) and the graffiti -- nearly always exceptionally lewd -- was never cleaned off. Sometimes the entire door had been removed, either by vandals or by an overzealous janitor anxious to teach his patrons an object lesson. The object lesson here was to convince the patron that on his next visit, he had better find five cents *someplace* to use one of the remaining pay toilets instead. Contrary to the image of the dutiful janitor who went along several times per day to swab the bowls, mop the floor, replenish the paper, etc., often times the pay facilities were only in *slightly* better condition than the newly-created by government fiat free version in the same room. About the only time one ever saw the 'janitor' was once a day or so when he scurried along from one stall to the next with his master key to open the coin boxes and dump all the coins in his little bag. In a case in the Municipal Court in Chicago in the early 1960's, a defendant who had been arrested by police because of an alleged lewd activity which had occurred in a pay stall was found not guilty when he argued that he had paid to rent the facility and therefore had an expectation of privacy, one of the key defenses in any claim that something lewd occurred in public. He did not deny the act took place, only that " ... it was not like we were in a free stall with no lock on the door and someone different opening the door to peer in every couple minutes to see if it was occupied or not." In the late 1960's the City of Chicago decided that pay toilets were against public policy and made the 'janitors', building owners and others remove all the Nic-o-locks completely and to meet certain standards of cleanlieness and decency. Shortly thereafter most of the places which had been available for public use in the downtown area were closed and/or made available to employees and customers only. Now one can walk for several blocks downtown without finding a public restroom for use without having to buy something from the restaurant or store where it is located. Many cities have now outlawed them also largely at the urging and litigation of CEPTIA. (Committee to Eliminate Pay Toilets in America). That's progress ... PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #37 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 25 21:00:01 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA24002; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 21:00:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 21:00:01 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903260200.VAA24002@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #38 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Mar 99 21:00:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 38 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Warning: Free Computer Scam (TELECOM Digest Editor) Half of Visa's Disputes, Fraud Result From I-commerce (Monty Solomon) Telecom Update (Canada) #175, March 22, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) Book Review: "How to Access the Federal Government on Internet" (Rob Slade) Question on Central Office Codes (Cheryl Gordon) Data Mediation (David Keighley) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 20:19:08 EST From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Warning: Free Computer Scam By now many folks have seen the latest variation on 'Make Money Fast', the one about a free computer if you go to website xxx and 'register'. A further variation says, 'what is better than getting a computer for free? Owning the web site where the free computers are given out ...' That in itself isn't news. Nothing much here suprises netizens any longer, at least not those who have been around since before that invention of the devil called the World Wide Web and the massive takeover of net resources by commercial entities to the detriment of the rest of us. But while most spam is just intended for petty larcency, some of it gets a bit more involved, and even sounds like it is coming from a real company and not just some two-bit con-artist with a computer and his own domain name set up somewhere. Today I have such a case for your consideration. **Please post this in all newsgroups and mailing lists where apropriate, because reasonably intelligent people are falling for it.** This time, the guy is not spamming; he is sending out press releases using the legitimate company name and people who read the 'press release' respond to him or his web site so they can get fleeced. Meet Johnnie Collie, of Muskegan, Michigan. Mr. Collie is using the name 'National Research, Inc'. Never mind that there is a *legitimate* research company in Michigan known as National Research Corporation, which is registered with the state. Mr. Collie is neither involved with that legimate firm, nor had they ever heard of him. He does not have a DBA ('doing business as') license registered for National Research. But I guess it always helps to have a legitimate company name behind you if you want to want to scam people. When I talked to Mr. Collie today, he told me the company was registered 'in another state' but he did not seem to know or want to say where. In this case, the scheme goes like this: to avoid complaints of spamming, put out press releases to the internet news services like Yahoo and others announcing that your research company has been employed by a national manufacturer of computer hardware to poll the public about its uses of computers. Toss in the name 'Packard Bell' or "Hewlitt Packard' for good measure. Let the internet news services and the search engines do your spamming for you ... ... now when someone sees your press release on their Yahoo ticker they click to read the article and are given your email address for details, in this case mailto:jccollie@aol.com ... A letter of inquiry to that email address gets back a note saying 'go to our web page and register for the program' ... and the web page address is http://www.getonefreepc.com ... there we find the deal to be thus: sign up for a totally free computer and monitor, the works. Fill out an online questionairre about how yourself and how you plan to use the computer. Agree to fill out a more detailed questionairre on the same subjects a year from now. This project is being backed by National Research, Inc, therefore it has to be legit, right? There is just one catch: to avoid simple curiosity seekers, people looking for something for nothing, people who defraud the company, etc ... there is a one-time registration fee of twenty dollars to participate. This fee, we are told, covers all the expenses of the polling, the distribution, etc. It goes to show that you are acting in good faith and not just a con-artist out to get a free computer. So fill out your form, give them your VISA number, then sit back and wait for your computer to arrive ... and keep on waiting, and waiting and waiting. The address given for the 'company' was 845 Allen Avenue in Muskegon, Michigan. I traced that back to being in a strictly residential neighborhood, and the residence of one 'Johnny Collie'. Switchboard.com shows it as 'A Collie' with three phone numbers given: A Collie 845 Allen Avenue Muskegon, MI 49442 Phones: 616-773-7878 773-7985 777-7515 The first number is answered personally; the second number goes to an answering machine which answers 'National Research'. I asked to speak with Johnny, and the man who answered said that was himself. I asked him when might the free computer be expected to arrive. "On the web I never said it would be coming right away. We are going to wait until we have the twelve thousand replies we wish to receive, then all computers will be shipped at one time." Oh, you mean no shipments until you have received twelve thousand 'processing fees' at twenty dollars each? How long might that take? "Well we just put our notice up this week ... Baloney. I have seen a variation on this a couple months ago that someone else mentioned, but anyway .... "We are having some trouble getting this totally together, it might be several months to a year before we have all the names accumulated." I told Johnny I had already talked to National Research Corporation and they knew nothing about this at all; had never even heard of him. I told him they knew of him now, since I gave them all the data I had on him including copies of his postings, etc. That's when he told me they were from out of state. Already having done a DNS lookup and other stuff on www.getonefreepc.com I asked Johnny where he got his ISP service, and who handled his domain name. He acted totally ignorant, claiming that all he knew how to do was turn a computer on and off, nothing much else. I asked him if he 'knew anything about a company called America On Line' and he said yeah, that was where he called in when he used his computer. I asked him who was his credit card processor; again he acted ignorant and said it 'is some outside service, you would have to ask the programmer who did my web page'. I asked to speak to that person, but of course he was not around and his name was not known. Using the 'Sam Spade' utility for Windows, we find a DNS record which shows as follows for getonefreepc.com: Administrative contact: J. Collie Technical contact: reg@wwwnexus.net Note that the site name does NOT have a 'dot' between www and nexus as in www.nexus -- that is incorrect. The name is wwwnexus, and apparently no connection to the Nexus Corporation in Connecticut. From what I could tell, wwwnexus.net is in Ohio somewhere. Johnny gets his credit card service from pluto.safe-order.net and he seemed very surprised that I was able to find that out. I told him if you do a raw dump of his web page, just look and see where the forms data sends its output, i.e. http://pluto.safe-order.net/getonefreepc/ Whispering sweetly in the phone, I told Johnny the first thing I wanted him to do was reverse that credit card transaction for me which I had used in this experiment. I had already sent a note to webmaster@pluto.safe-order.net and 'abuse' at the same site telling them to void the transaction, and giving them the reference numbers. I also sent a note to webmaster and abuse@wwwnexus.net asking them to review their relationship with Johnny Collie for possible violations of their rules. And of course, for the little good it did I also sent a note to TOS at America On Line, suggesting it might be worthwhile to review their subscriber's screen name tccollie for possible violations. I mention this today only to remind readers that some scams on the net are far more sophisticated than others. Very few of us spend five seconds reading or considering all the chain letters and make money fast items we get each day. It being spam, we automatically reject it for having no value. But when it appears in a respected news source such as Yahoo, and carries the name of a legitimate company -- although not actually from that company -- then we might tend to read the item and act on it. ** DO NOT BE DECIEVED BY EMAIL OR NEWSGROUP POSTINGS OR OTHER NEWS SOURCES SAYING THAT NATIONAL RESEARCH INC IS GIVING A FREE COMPUTER IF YOU WILL PARTICIPATE IN THEIR STUDY. YOU WILL GET NO COMPUTER, AND YOU WILL LOSE TWENTY DOLLARS. NATIONAL RESEARCH CORPORATION IS INVOLVED IN THIS IN ANY WAY. IF YOU ARE WAITING TO GET YOUR COMPUTER OR HAVE ASKED FOR THE RETURN OF YOUR MONEY, TRY ASKING JOHNNY COLLIE, 845 ALLEN AVE, MUSKEGON, MI 49442 616-773-7878 773-7985 777-7515. And consider pressuring organizations such as wwwnexus.net and pluto.safe-order.net who accept clients such as this. All it does is besmirch their own reputation on the net as safe places to be. *PLEASE DISTRIBUTE THIS TO OTHER GROUPS AS APPROPRIATE, WITHOUT SPAMMING TO DO SO. THANK YOU.* Patrick Townson Editor/Publisher Telecom Digest http://telecom-digest.org ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 21:50:45 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Half of Visa's Disputes, Fraud Result From I-commerce By David Legard InfoWorld Electric Posted at 10:24 AM PT, Mar 24, 1999 SINGAPORE -- Although only 2 percent of Visa International's credit card business relates to Internet transactions, 50 percent of its disputes and discovered frauds are in that area, the company said here Tuesday. It is consumers who are responsible for most of the disputes and fraud, not merchants, Mark Cullimore, director of emerging technology at Visa International Asia-Pacific, said here Tuesday at the Second Roundtable on E-Commerce in Asia, organized by Economist Conferences. http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?990324.eivisa.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 25 Mar 1999 09:39:57 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #175, March 22, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 175: March 22, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Atlantic Telcos to Merge ** Nortel, HP to Offer PBX in a PC ** Competition Bureau Rejects ADSL Intervention ** Jail for Telemarketing Fraud ** ISP Takes Spam Artist to Court ** Bell Forms New Operator Services Company ** CRTC Seeks Comment on Price Cap Revision ** CRTC Approves Bell CDID Tariff ** Bell Offers Home Security ** Telus Files Law Enforcement Tariff ** CBTA Launches Quarterly Magazine ** CAIP Elects Officers ** Telezone to Sue Ottawa ** MetroNet Closes Netcom Deal ** Telesat Loses Brazil Orbital Slot ** Hughes Plans New Broadband Satellite Service ** Globalstar Launches Four Satellites ** Wireless Deregulated in Dryden ** Eight Days Left for Telemanagement Bonus ============================================================ ATLANTIC TELCOS TO MERGE: Bruncor, Island Telecom, Maritime Telegraph and Telephone, and NewTel Enterprises, owners of the four Atlantic telephone companies, have agreed to merge on May 31. The provincial telcos themselves will continue as separate entities and keep their current names. BCE Inc. will own 41.6% of the merged company. ** NewTel's Stephen Wetmore will be president and CEO of the new company, which has the working name "AtlanticCo." Bruncor's Lino Celeste will be Chairman; MT&T's Colin Latham will be President of the telecommunications division; NBTel's Gerry Pond will be President of the information technology and emerging business division. ** Last week, before the deal was finalized, New Brunswick Premier Camille Theriault expressed concern that such a merger might reduce employment in the province and weaken his government's close relationship with NBTel. NORTEL, HP TO OFFER PBX IN A PC: Nortel Networks has introduced hardware and software which provide "complete key system, PBX, and voice mail functionality" in a Windows NT computer. Hewlett Packard will offer it later this year as the Business Communications Server, for systems of five to 80 stations. COMPETITION BUREAU REJECTS ADSL INTERVENTION: The federal Competition Bureau has decided not to challenge Bell Canada's ADSL pricing policy, as requested by six Internet Providers. The Bureau says that the retail Internet market is highly competitive and that the order sought by the ISPs "would impede the introduction of this new technology and deny consumers the benefits of price and service competition." (See Telecom Update #145) http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/ct01476e.html JAIL FOR TELEMARKETING FRAUD: For the first time, a Canadian court has imposed jail sentences for telemarketing fraud. The sentences, ranging from two to six months plus community service, were levied against five employees of a Montreal company which operated as American Family Publishers, Publishers Central, and First Canadian Publishers. The company's president will be sentenced on May 5. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/ct01443e.html ** Amendments to the Competition Act which went into effect on March 18 make telemarketing fraud a criminal offense subject to sentences of up to five years, plus fines. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/ct01451e.html ISP TAKES SPAM ARTIST TO COURT: Toronto-based Internet Direct has asked the Ontario Court for a cease-and-desist order against an individual who, they claim, sent out at least 150,000 promotional e-mails last year without permission. Internet Direct estimates that 30% of e-mail it delivers is spam. BELL FORMS NEW OPERATOR SERVICES COMPANY: Bell Canada and Excell Global Services have created Nordia Inc. to offer operator services. Nordia, which is majority owned by Bell, plans to begin operations in Kitchener-Waterloo and Corunna, Ontario, and in Quebec City, between May and September. (See Telecom Update #166) CRTC SEEKS COMMENT ON PRICE CAP REVISION: On March 5, the CRTC set a floor of cost plus 25% for NBTel's business rates, even if the price cap rules would otherwise require them to be lower. Public Notice 99-9 asks whether this policy should be extended to other incumbent local carriers. To take part, register by March 29. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-09.htm CRTC APPROVES BELL CDID TARIFF: Last October, complying with a CRTC order, Bell filed tariffs for Customer Direct Information Delivery. Order 99-254 approves the proposed rates, despite objections by Distributel and London Telecom. (See Telecom Update #110, 147). http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0254.htm BELL OFFERS HOME SECURITY: Bell Gardium, a home security company formed last year after Bell Canada purchased two security companies, says it will soon offer "smart home" products that can boot up a computer or manage energy consumption, among other functions. TELUS FILES LAW ENFORCEMENT TARIFF: Telus Communications has asked the CRTC's okay for Law Enforcement Agency Service, which would, when legally authorized, provide confidential subscriber information ($6) or wiretaps ($200). CRTC Public Notice 99-10 asks comment; to take part, give notice by April 16. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-09.htm CBTA LAUNCHES QUARTERLY MAGAZINE: The Canadian Business Telecommunications Alliance has launched a quarterly magazine, CBTA Connections. Requests for a sample copy should be faxed to 416-924-4408. CAIP ELECTS OFFICERS: The Canadian Association of Internet Providers has elected new officers. Chris Scatliff (UUNet) is Chair; Rob Hall (Echelon Internet), Vice Chair; Scott Knapman (Bell Nexxia), Treasurer; Paul Barrett, Secretary. TELEZONE TO SUE OTTAWA: The Financial Post reports that TeleZone, an unsuccessful candidate for a PCS license in 1995, is suing the federal government for $100 Million. The company, which previously held a PCTS license, says that Industry Canada secretly changed the evaluation criteria. METRONET CLOSES NETCOM DEAL: MetroNet Communications says it has closed its deal to purchase a majority interest in Internet provider Netcom Canada. Netcom CEO Ron Close will remain with MetroNet. (See Telecom Update #168) TELESAT LOSES BRAZIL ORBITAL SLOT: The Brazilian government has awarded an orbital satellite spot to Loral, rejecting a bid by Telesat Canada. (See Telecom Update #171) HUGHES PLANS NEW BROADBAND SATELLITE SERVICE: Hughes Electronics says it will spend $4 Billion to build a broadband data satellite system named Spaceway, which will begin operations in North America with two satellites in 2002. GLOBALSTAR LAUNCHES FOUR SATELLITES: Globalstar, which is building a Low Earth Orbit satellite phone system, has launched four more satellites, bringing the total in orbit to 16 -- one-third of the full complement. Globalstar's Canadian partner is Cancom. WIRELESS DEREGULATED IN DRYDEN: Last October, the CRTC adopted a framework for the deregulation of wireless service by municipally owned telcos. Order 99-242 now deregulates wireless service by the Dryden, Ontario, phone company. (See Telecom Update #153) EIGHT DAYS LEFT FOR TELEMANAGEMENT BONUS: Until March 30, new subscribers to Telemanagement receive "Tips, Tricks and Traps," a collection of 22 practical reports and resources by Ian Angus, Lis Angus, and Henry Dortmans. Included in the collection: ** "Eight Ways to Stretch Your Phone Budget" and other techniques to cut costs without reducing quality ** "Those '50% of Savings' Deals" -- a self-defense guide against ill-advised contingency proposals ** "Angus's Laws for Understanding and Surviving (and Possibly Profiting From) the New Telecom" To subscribe to Telemanagement (and receive Tips, Tricks and Traps) call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225 or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 08:27:26 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "How to Access the Federal Government on Internet" Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKHAFGOI.RVW 990218 "How to Access the Federal Government on the Internet", Bruce Maxwell, 1999, 1-56802-387-1, U$28.95 %A Bruce Maxwell bmaxwell@mindspring.com %C 1414 22nd Street N.W., Washington, DC 20037 %D 1999 %G 1-56802-387-1 ISSN 1088-7466 %I Congressional Quarterly Inc. %O U$28.95 800-638-1710 fax 202-887-6706 bookhelp@cq.com %P 328 p. %S Washington Online %T "How to Access the Federal Government on the Internet, 4th ed." For those interested in (the U.S.) government, and access to its information, Maxwell has provided a very useful compendium of addresses. As he admits, this is not an exhaustive list to U.S. federal government systems available through the Internet, but it definitely gives a good, broad starting field. University and other sites with a specialized interest in the government are listed, although these are taking up less space as the directory expands, and concentrates more directly on those sites provided by the government. The reader is expected to be reasonably familiar with the Internet use: the information given in the introduction is intended only to help keep the listings brief. The site descriptions do note the type of access method (increasingly, of course, this is the World Wide Web). All of that would be extremely valuable for those interested in government and access to information, but since the feds have fingers in just about every pie, there is much more. The various departments provide information on access to information, agriculture, arts and museums, business, children and families, defense, computers, demographics, education, emergency response, energy, environment, foreign affairs, medicine, history, employment, law, technology, space, and transportation. Government sites often provide the most informative content to be found in the net. Maxwell has added to this with a very useful index: I didn't really expect to find anything under computer viruses but was pleasantly surprised to note a third site from a government department has taken an interest. For the avid U.S. government watcher, an essential. For the serious Internet information gatherer, regardless of nationality, a very useful resource. (Sigh. Yes, it does tell you where to find the Starr report.) copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995 - 1999 BKHAFGOI.RVW 990218 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com I have seen progress in an egg. It's called `going bad.' http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Cheryl.Gordon@alltel.com Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 11:15:19 -0600 Subject: Question About Central Office Codes In TIA/EIA-553 A table is included of Troublesome Central Offices Codes. These are codes that Wireless should not be using, due to conflicts with the Wireless overhead data. This document is rather old, and I would like to know if this list is still valid, or if technology has taken care of these issues. Responses can be sent to: Cheryl.Gordon@alltel.com Thanks for your assistance. Cheryl ------------------------------ From: David Keighley Subject: Data Mediation Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 14:48:02 -0500 Hi - I am looking for information regarding data network mediation for billing....more specifically, mediation for billing variable usage for ATM, Frame Relay, X.25 etc. Also, information on data formats supported by mediation platforms, and some of the best mediation companies out there doing this ... got any thoughts, suggestions? David ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #38 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Mar 25 22:23:33 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA27368; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:23:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:23:33 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903260323.WAA27368@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #39 TELECOM Digest Thu, 25 Mar 99 22:23:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 39 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Canada's Competition Act Targets Deceptive Telemarketing (Nigel Allen) Mitnick Pleads Guilty, Gets Another Year in Jail (Monty Solomon) Watch Out! Sprint's Done it to the Consumer Again (Joseph Norton) Sprint PCS Loses Too ... (Jon Solomon) Book Review: "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Networking" (Rob Slade) New Book: ATM For Public Networks (Ronald H. Davis) ATT Partner Plus and External Voicemail PC (Jim Santos) Re: German Hotel Phone Rates (Sheraton Not Only Offender) (John R. Covert) Last Laugh! Can You Believe This Man? (John Stahl) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 16:39:03 -0500 From: Nigel Allen Subject: Canada's Competition Act Targets Deceptive Telemarketing Here is a press release from the Competition Bureau of Canada's Industry department. I do not work for the government of Canada, but I thought that the press release might be of interest to readers of this Digest. NEWS RELEASE TRANSMITTED BY CANADIAN CORPORATE NEWS FOR: INDUSTRY CANADA MARCH 18, 1999 Industry Canada - Changes to The Competition Act Target Deceptive Telemarketing OTTAWA, ONTARIO--Changes to the Competition Act which came into force today give the Competition Bureau new powers to use in the investigation of scam artists who use the telephone to exploit the trust of unsuspecting consumers. Provisions making deceptive telemarketing a new criminal offence and allowing the Bureau to use wiretapping to investigate phone fraud are the centrepiece of Bill C-20. They include a number of changes that clarify competition law, streamline legal processes and give the courts more flexibility in dealing with anti-competitive conduct. "The changes included in Bill C-20 provide the tools we need to fight the demeaning crime of deceptive telemarketing," said John Manley, Minister of Industry. "The new law ensures that we enter the 21st century with sound competition laws that encourage compliance, and yet ensure that those who break the law can be brought to justice." The new provisions: - make deceptive telemarketing a criminal offence punishable by a maximum of five years in prison and a fine within the discretion of the court, on conviction on indictment; - require telemarketers to disclose who they work for, the value of the products they are promoting, and other specified information that will help potential victims distinguish legitimate telemarketers from the criminals and - permit the Bureau to apply for judicial authorization to intercept private communications without consent (wiretap) to investigate the most serious cases involving price fixing and market sharing, bid rigging, and deceptive telemarketing. The new Competition Act also: - creates a civil process which enables the Bureau to use court orders to stop misleading advertising and deceptive marketing practices quickly; - retains deliberate or reckless misrepresentation as a criminal offence and increases the potential penalty; - revises and clarifies the law concerning ordinary price claims by retailers; - streamlines the merger review process to reduce the regulatory burden on business while ensuring that the Bureau gets the information it needs to assess the effect of the transaction on competition; - enables the Bureau to apply for court orders prohibiting persons from engaging in criminal offences under the Competition Act, and requiring them to take positive steps to prevent future offences; - provides for the protection of the identity of persons ("whistle- blowers") who report offences under the Act to the Bureau, and makes it illegal for employers to take reprisal against employees who make such reports on reasonable belief and in good faith; - changes the title of the head of the Bureau from 'Director of Investigation and Research' to 'Commissioner of Competition' to better reflect the dual law enforcement and policy functions of the position, and - confirms the Commissioner's authority for the administration and the enforcement of the Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act, the Textile Labelling Act, and the Precious Metals Marking Act. Supplementary information on the provisions is available on the Bureau's web site at: http://competition.ic.gc.ca The coming into force of the provisions of Bill C-20 relating to deceptive telemarketing will also bring into force a provision of Bill C-51. This provision is a recent amendment to the Criminal Code which targets the proceeds of deceptive telemarketing for seizure and forfeiture on the same basis as the proceeds of other types of fraud. Competition Bureau Senior Communications Advisor (819) 953-5303 or Competition Bureau Information Centre 1-800-348-5358 National Capital Region: (819) 997-4282 forwarded by Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario, Canada http://www.interlog.com/~ndallen/telecom.html ndallen@interlog.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Mitnick Pleads Guilty, Gets Another Year in Jail Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 18:19:49 -0500 Mitnick Pleads Guilty by Douglas Thomas After four years awaiting trial at the Los Angeles Metropolitan Detention Center, it appears that Kevin Mitnick may not have his day in court after all. Responding to reports that Mitnick has agreed to plead guilty to cracking-related offenses, Mitnick's attorney, Don Randolph, confirmed that a pleading had been filed, but was unable to discuss the specifics. The pleading, filed late Tuesday afternoon, must still be approved by U.S. District Judge Marianne Pfaelzer. http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/18566.html By Ian Stokell, Newsbytes. LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, U.S.A., A Web site calling itself "The Official Kevin Mitnick Site," has apparently confirmed an Associated Press report and a Los Angeles Times article, both released earlier today, that said the infamous hacker has signed a plea agreement that would result in him spending another year in jail. A message on the Web site said, "... a plea agreement sealed and filed `in camera' has been leaked to the public. The prosecution has confirmed that the document was filed." http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/128105.html ------------------------------ From: Joseph Norton Subject: Watch Out! Sprint's Done it to the Consumer Again Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 04:32:19 -0500 Hi Pat and listers: Last week I tried to use my Sprint Unlimited service and was informed that my "Long-Distance service has been temporarily discontinued." Of course, I called Customer Service. Their explanation was something like this: "We show you're on our Sprint Unlimited Canada option. These lines are monitored very closely. We detected that the calls you are making are data/fax calls and so we discontinued your service." Naturally, the rep I spoke with could not site any actual examples of such calls. When asked what recourse I had, the rep explained that they could re-activate my service, however, I would have to select one of their "standard" plans -- the Sprint Unlimited option "is no longer available on this account." Now, for my ***POSSIBLE*** mistake. I do have a modem on that line, however, I have been scrupulously careful ***NOT*** to use it on LD calls. When I did make LD data calls I switched them off to another carrier. However, during my first use of the plan several months ago, I did attempt to use the line for one data call, but, had to move it off to another carrier because I had too many modem re-trains on Sprint. It is also possible that I may have dialed into the Chattan- ooga number of my ISP (briefly) because the local number was down, but, I was usually careful to switch that call off to a different carrier, though, I could not swear that I remembered every time. Now, I'd like to know if that call is the one they're contending is the offending call or if they can actually site other examples and prove that I was using data (and not voice). I know that many carriers use echo suppressors for data calls. Aren't these activated by the initial handshake tone used on fax and modem calls? If I accidentally dialed a fax number and, having heard the initial handshake tone, hung up, could the echo suppressor still have been activated and caused some kind of alarm? We've all been wondering how they detect that you're making data calls. In any case, watch your calls on your lines that have Sprint Unlimited service on them. Don't even dial a fax number accidentally :-). Don't even whistle in the range that might activate those echo suppressors (if that's how they work). I think I'll check out AT&T's Personal Network service -- a thousand minutes is better than none :-). Joseph (Joe) Norton Dalton, Georgia, U.S.A.--The Carpet Capital of the World! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did they even say anything at all about fax and modem calls not being allowed when you first signed up for the service or was it like 'Friday Free' where sort of mid-way through the program they decided to change the rules and to hell with any contracts they had outstanding? I honestly cannot think of a situation in AT&T's ugliest events in the old days which came close to being as bad as some of Sprint's actions over the past decade. You want to hear some interesting items about Sprint? Investigate how they are handling their local service functions in places where they bought out small independent telcos. For example, in north-central Kansas where Southwestern Bell is the principal telco, there are a few small areas run by independents such as United Telephone. Sprint bought out United, and pity the poor folks in places like Junction City, KS and tiny communities in the vicinity which now have local service from Sprint, like it or lump it. It is not a question of Sprint being a competitor in those areas, it is Sprint as the carrier, period. Oddly, the telephone directories for Junction City are issued by Southwestern Bell, and only if one spends awhile reading deeply into the introductory pages of the directory -- or perhaps calling the phone number listed for the SWBT business office does one find that to get service in Junction City or Fort Riley, KS you must call Sprint. Southwestern Bell also handles the intra-lata toll for the area, directory assistance and operator services. All Sprint does is provide the local service, answer their business office phones and make excuses for the poor service. Reports I've heard are that Sprint in that area has apparently reneged on a lot of the deals and contracts United Telephone had with customers. They send out written letters to customers saying one thing, and then repudiate whatever they wrote about later on, etc. If customer says they will be bound legally by what they had put in writing, they say no they won't; you can sue them or whatever. And even though Sprint joined MCI years ago in wimpering and whining about how unfair AT&T was in long distance competition, they are fighting hard to keep any realistic competition out of the local areas where they purchased the United Telephone facilities. In the next message in this issue, Jon Solomon discusses the poor quality service from Sprint PCS. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:13:49 EST From: Jon Solomon Subject: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... My Sprint PCS phone won't work inside my house, but my BAM service (digital) works fine. I guess that's because SPRINT PCS uses a larger frequency (I heard it is in the Gigihertz), while Bell Atlantic Mobile digital service uses 900 mhz. I ordered two separate Sprint PCS phones which I cannot use any more. I guess that's why Sprint PCS doesn't require contracts. I had to disconnect both of them ... They say that when they start selling analog/digital phones the problem will go away, but I don't consider use of AMPS circuits to replace digital service adequate ... --jsol ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 10:26:33 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Networking", B. Wagner Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKCIGNTW.RVW 990211 "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Networking", Bill Wagner/Chris Negus, 1999, 0-7897-1802-2, U$16.99/C$24.95/UK#15.49 %A Bill Wagner bwagner@altavista.net %A Chris Negus chris.negus@cwix.com %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 1999 %G 0-7897-1802-2 %I Macmillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$16.99/C$24.95/UK#15.49 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 info@mcp.com %P 334 p. %S Complete Idiot's Guide %T "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Networking, Second Edition" A guide to networking is a rather ambitious project. It's kind of like a guide to life, being the technical equivalent to the universe and everything. A forgiving reviewer would therefore tolerate gaps in coverage, on the basis that the task is impossible. Regular readers will have noticed that I expect authors to deliver what they promise. Part one purports to give us a definition of a network, plus a reason for having one. While chapter one presents a lot of types of networks (LANs, CANs, MANs, WANs, and the Internet), essentially both chapters in this section suggest a number of possible uses without getting much beyond "these computers talk to each other" in terms of explanation. Part two looks at basic concepts in networking. Chapter three does a very tolerable job of looking at the difference between peer-to-peer and client/server networking. The explanation of topologies is not handled as well, mixing basic types and hybrids. On the other hand, the technical differences between topologies is probably not apparent to naive users. However, the comparison table has some problems and errors in it as well. If, though, the audience is that basic, then the discussion of architectures in chapter five is pretty meaningless. (On the other hand, if the audience is more advanced, the discussion is insufficient.) Lots of hardware gets thrown around, but without real discussion of the implications, in chapter six. Chapter seven's brief look at network operating systems is terse, in some places misleading, and definitely slanted in favour of Microsoft. Part three discusses connection and configuration. Chapter eight does suggest a few questions to ask when planning, but does so in a very disorganized manner. The advice on buying equipment in chapter nine is alternately banal and questionable. Some of the dialogue boxes for network configuration are listed in chapter ten. Part four overviews maintenance and administration. Chapter eleven presents a few administrative NT dialogue boxes and UNIX commands. There is a bit of generic discussion of backup options in chapter twelve. Is the choice of chapter thirteen for a grab bag of security speculation with far too little solid advice intentionally ironic, or just fortuitous? Chapter fourteen's troubleshooting advice is way beyond the material in the rest of the book, relying on sophisticated protocol analyzers and expensive commercial tools. Random bits from a book on upgrading your PCs constitute chapter fifteen, and the same is true for telecommuting in sixteen. Part five looks at the Internet. There are some basic concepts in chapter seventeen, and a chat about email in eighteen. For those who are completely new to networking, the text is quite readable, and presents some very simple ideas and terminology well. However, that is all it does. A great many very important concepts are completely missed, and such a vast area of topics are never discussed that the reader may merely be left with enough information to be a danger to him or herself. Those setting up the simplest and most basic of small office networks will need system specific instructions, and those looking at larger projects will need greater understanding than this book provides. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKCIGNTW.RVW 990211 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com On the other hand, you have different fingers. http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Ronald H. Davis Subject: New Book: ATM For Public Networks Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 11:13:31 -0600 Organization: Lucent Technologies I am author of a just released book entitled "ATM For Public Networks" which is published by McGraw-Hill. The primary objectives of the book are to discuss topics related to carrying voice and data over ATM, and the interworking of ATM with other services. One approach that I took in the book which I think is different from other books is to examine the interactions of IP and ATM, and TCP and ATM as separate topics. I also present technology comparisons that allow the reader to understand the comparative efficiencies of IP over ATM versus IP over SONET, and voice over ATM versus voice of h.323/IP versus voice over h.323/ATM. In addition, I discuss the implications of ATM for the internet, and how ATM interworks with the integrated services internet and RSVP. I also present case studies to show the deployment of ATM in the internet. I really did attempt to write this book objectively, so I tried to avoid trying to tell the reader that ATM was "the solution". Instead, I sought to provide the reader with a conceptual framework for evaulating ATM versus other technology options and to think about where ATM can be of the most benefit. I might add, that the discussions in comp.dcom.cell-relay were very helpful to me during the writing of this book and the newsgroup is appropriately recognized in the acknowlegements. :-) The book is currently available from booksellers. I hope that you find "ATM For Public Networks" to be informative, and thought provoking reading. __ ______ __ / __/ | lucent technologies, naperville il, usa _/ (_(_) / (_(_/_/_(_/ . ronald.h.davis@lucent.com author of "atm for public networks" published by mcgraw-hill http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0071344764 ------------------------------ From: Jim Santos Subject: ATT Partner Plus & External Voicemail PC Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 09:23:44 -0500 Reply-To: jimkathy@ma.ultranet.com Hi, We have an AT&T Partner Plus system that we 'inherited' from the previous occupants (so we have very little documentation on it). We have hooked a PC running voicemail software to the PBX. The VM software has a couple of fields that allow you to specify the codes used to turn on/off the message lights on the individual phones (Feature+09+ext & Feature+10+ext). T he problem is that our PBX is configured so that when a line is taken off hook, it immediately connects to an outside line. So the voicemail system sends it's light on/off codes out over the active line instead of into the PBX. It was suggested to us that we reconfigure our PBX to require a '9' prefix to get an outside line, but none of what little documentation we have tells us how to do that. I would greatly appreciate it if someone could give us a hand in figuring this out. Also, is there anyplace online or otherwise where we could get documentation for the Partner Plus system? Local dealers around here say that the system is too old and the doc is not available. Thanks, Jim Santos jimkathy@ma.ultranet.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 23:52:54 -0500 From: John R. Covert Subject: Re: German Hotel Phone Rates (Sheraton Not Only Offender) TELECOM Digest readers will recall that I wrote to Mr. Barry Sternlicht, the President of Starwood Hotels, who own Sheraton, concerning outrageous local call charges at their hotel in Frankfurt. The hotel's phone rates are seven times the local call rate, making local calls cost thirty-five cents (fifty-seven pfennigs) per minute. I can call Frankfurt from the United States for twenty-five cents per minute including taxes. Mr. Sternlicht, I learned, is unavailable to take customer complaints, and a clerk in his office referred the letter to the hotel. I received the following response: Dear Mr. Covert, We refer to your letter to Mr. Barry Sternlicht which has been forwarded to us by his office, regarding the telephone charges at Sheraton Frankfurt Hotel and Conference Centre. We appreciate you taking the time to share your disappointment about the telephone charges with us and do understand your displeasure. However, as far as the price structure of our telephone system is concerned, we can assure you that our prices are very similar to those of other hotels in this area and furthermore similar to other hotels in Europe. You mentioned in your letter a 600% profit without labor costs. Apart from the fact that we employ 12 switchboard operators, we had to build recently a new internal network at a cost of DM 1,5 million including new telephone sets in our 1000 guest rooms, digital lines, modem connections, voice mail system, etc; all this to ensure we continue to meet and where possible exceed customer demands. Given the recent restructuring of telephone charges by various providers we will take a serious look at the way our charges are a fair reflection of the costs we incur and more in particular between our charges for local, national, and international costs. Dear Mr. Covert, we trust you have understanding for our position and we hope that we will have the pleasure of welcoming you again to our hotel when your travel brings you back to Frankfurt. Sincerely, SHERATON FRANKFURT HOTEL Peter Stephan Exec. Asst. Manager ------------------------------ From: John Stahl Subject: Last Laugh! Can You Believe This Man? Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:40:50 +0000 The following AP news piece was in the Business section of my local newspaper Thursday, 3/18/99 (the Binghamton Press and Sun Bulletin) which appears to indicate the "double-speak" way the largest software company in the world reveals to the Federal Court one thing and to the public another: "(Washington AP)- Microsoft's Bill Gates, writing in an upcoming book about the benefits of technology tools for business, appears to contradict a key witness for his company at its antitrust trial when he describes how Microsoft tracks important sales figures. Gates, the company's billionaire chairman, said he can quickly analyze Microsoft's sales records because they're tracked electronically. But an outside economist testifying for Microsoft just weeks ago told a federal judge almost apologetically that the company's accounting records were kept "by hand on sheets of paper." Economist Richard Schmalense explained why he couldn't provide for the government details about Microsoft's profits, saying the company's decidedly low-tech accounting techniques "do not always rise to the level of sophistication one might expect."" Wonder who is trying to fool whom? John Stahl Aljon Enterprises Telecom/Data Consultants email: aljon@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #39 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Mar 26 01:28:03 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA04744; Fri, 26 Mar 1999 01:28:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 01:28:03 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903260628.BAA04744@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #40 TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Mar 99 01:28:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 40 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) #174, March 15, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) A Major Cellular Phone Hazard: The Violable Privacy of Bills (M. Solomon) Ericsson, Qualcomm Settle Phone Standard Dispute (Monty Solomon) UCLA Short Course: Cost Estimation and Economic Evaluation (Bill Goodin) Re: KSU-less System Recommendations (support@sellcom.com) Re: KXU-less System Recommendations (Michael N. Marcus) Re: What is the Number For 1000 cps Test Tone? (Seymour Dupa) Re: Local Call Dialing Question (Carl Moore) Re: "No Solicitation" Residential Phone Feature (Pat Noziska) First UMTS Licences Granted in Finland (Juha Veijalainen) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 11:10:22 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #174, March 15, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 174: March 15, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Bell Nexxia Network in Service ** PSINet Unhappy With Bell DSL Offer ** Nortel and Microsoft in IP Alliance ** Newbridge Wins Global One Contract ** AT&T Approves Nortel as "Potential Supplier" ** New Names for Old -- Nortel, Videotron, Bellcore ** BCT.Telus to Close Outsource Call Center ** LNP in Four New Cities ** CRTC Opens Two Forbearance Proceedings ** MTS Completes Share Buyback ** TigerTel Buys Montreal LD Reseller ** BCE Forms Media Group ** New Faces at Optel ** Cantel Denies AT&T Takeover ** Industry Canada Spectrum Consultation ** NewTel Buying Software Kinetics ** PageNet to Distribute RIM 2-Way Pager in U.S. ** BridgePoint to Market U.S. Fiber Link ** Correction ** National Super-Carriers -- the New Balance of Power ============================================================ BELL NEXXIA NETWORK IN SERVICE: On March 11, Bell Nexxia turned up the Toronto-Winnipeg-Chicago portion of its national backbone network. The company says the rest of the IP-based fiber net, which uses technology from Nortel and Cisco, will be completed in April. ** Bell Nexxia and Cisco Systems have signed a technology and marketing agreement to develop and promote IP-based services. PSINET UNHAPPY WITH BELL DSL OFFER: Internet Service 2Provider PSINet says that Bell Canada's proposed 1-Meg Modem Gateway Access service (see Telecom Update #173) is inadequate. President Nadir Desai says the plan "requires an exclusive agreement that still does not provide adequate pricing." ** The Canadian Association of Internet Providers expressed support for PSINet's statement. NORTEL AND MICROSOFT IN IP ALLIANCE: Today Nortel, Microsoft, Intel, and Hewlett-Packard will announce joint work on "enterprise solutions that span data, telephony, and Internet." NEWBRIDGE WINS GLOBAL ONE CONTRACT: Global One, a joint venture of Sprint, France Telecom, and Deutsche Telekom, will use Newbridge's ATM switching system in its worldwide network. AT&T APPROVES NORTEL AS "POTENTIAL SUPPLIER": AT&T has selected Nortel Networks as a potential supplier of network switches. AT&T is evaluating Nortel's DMS-250 switch, which supports an evolution to packet-based switching. NEW NAMES FOR OLD -- NORTEL, VIDEOTRON, BELLCORE: ** Nortel is changing its legal name from Northern Telecom Ltd. to Nortel Networks Corp. to underline its character as a "provider of integrated network solutions." ** Videotron Telecom has been renamed Videotron Business Network. ** Bellcore, recently acquired by Scientific Applications International Corp. (SAIC), is now operating as Telcordia Technologies. BCT.TELUS TO CLOSE OUTSOURCE CALL CENTER: BCT.Telus is leaving the third-party call center business. Telus Marketing Services, which has 50 full-time and 350 part-time employees, will cease operations over the next three months. ** The Edmonton Journal reports that BCT.Telus is also closing down its 11-year-old Talking Yellow Pages, citing declining demand and Y2K problems. LNP IN FOUR NEW CITIES: Local Number Portability will be ready for commercial service in the St-Hyacinthe, London, and Kitchener exchanges on or about March 29 and in North Vancouver by April 2. CRTC OPENS TWO FORBEARANCE PROCEEDINGS: Public Notices 99-7 and 99-8 invite comment on applications by Stentor members that the CRTC forbear from regulating their Digital Network Access Services and Wide Area Networking services. To participate, notify the Commission by April 6. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-07.htm http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/internet/1999/8045/03/pn99-08.htm MTS COMPLETES SHARE BUYBACK: Manitoba Telecom Services has completed the buyback of 14 million common shares at $22 a share. The buyback was part of the deal under which Bell Canada purchased 20% of MTS. TIGERTEL BUYS MONTREAL LD RESELLER: TigerTel Services has acquired Argos Alliance, a Montreal-based business long distance reseller. BCE FORMS MEDIA GROUP: BCE has reorganized its satellite businesses (Telesat Canada, TMI Communications, and ExpressVu) and other broadcasting-related services into the BCE Media group, with Alain Gourd as President and CEO. NEW FACES AT OPTEL: Optel Communications, a Toronto-based Centrex reseller and prospective Competitive Local Exchange Carrier, has appointed Bruce Hughes, formerly of Sprint Canada, as Vice-President Marketing. Ron Irvine, formerly of Rogers Cantel, is now VP Sales, and John Nesbitt from Bell Canada is VP Customer Care. CANTEL DENIES AT&T TAKEOVER: Rogers Cantel says that while it is in ongoing discussions with AT&T Canada, "there is no contemplation of a takeover" of Cantel "as suggested in speculation in a recent press article." INDUSTRY CANADA SPECTRUM CONSULTATION: Industry Canada seeks comment on whether to open to unlicensed short-range radio devices the 462/467 MHz spectrum band now used by public safety and licensed commercial users. Send submissions to wireless@ic.gc.ca by May 14. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/sf01740e.html NEWTEL BUYING SOFTWARE KINETICS: Newfoundland's telco, NewTel Enterprises, will purchase Software Kinetics, which makes e-commerce software, for $20 Million. NewTel says its IT business will make up 21% of its sales this year. PAGENET TO DISTRIBUTE RIM 2-WAY PAGER IN U.S.: PageNet, which claims 10 million paging subscribers in North America, will distribute the Research In Motion Inter@ctive Pager 950 in the U.S. BRIDGEPOINT TO MARKET U.S. FIBER LINK: Montreal-based BridgePoint Enterprises will market PrimeLink's Montreal- Albany fiber to Canadian businesses and carriers. CORRECTION: Telecom Update #171 reported that Bell Nexxia's headquarters will be in Calgary. That should have read the western Canadian headquarters. The company's head office is in Toronto. NATIONAL SUPER-CARRIERS -- THE NEW BALANCE OF POWER: In the March issue of Telemanagement, now available, Ian and Lis Angus examine the new landscape of Canadian telecommunications created by mergers and realignments of its largest carriers. Also in Telemanagement #163: ** "Are Your Systems Y2K-Compliant?" Challenges before equipment vendors and enterprise systems. ** "Forecasting Without Numbers" -- how to plan a call center when there's no historical data. Until March 30, new subscribers to Telemanagement will receive without charge the 22 reports and resources in "Tips, Tricks and Traps." To subscribe, call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225, or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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. ============================================================ ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: A Major Cellular Phone Hazard: The Violable Privacy of Bills Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 19:19:33 -0500 By RICHARD B. SCHMITT Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL March 16, 1999 Last fall, when AT&T Corp.'s wireless unit turned over a TV journalist's cell-phone records to a defense lawyer in a Denver murder case, it was news to the journalist. The telephone company had neither sought the reporter's consent nor alerted her to the possibility that her records would be disclosed. The AT&T unit says the no-notice policy is standard operating procedure and entirely legal. Yet AT&T's own long-distance unit notifies its customers of billing disclosures unless authorities say such notification would jeopardize criminal investigations. The conflicting policies are being reviewed by AT&T after receiving a written complaint from the TV station's owner, McGraw-Hill Cos., but they are "grounded in historical and practical reasons," according to Gregory Landis, the wireless unit's general counsel. Every year, the AT&T wireless unit fields roughly 15,000 subpoenas for phone records, or five times the volume handled by AT&T's long-distance unit. Cell-phone records are in hot demand because, unlike standard phone records, they give prosecutors and private litigants a glimpse of local calling patterns and a way to trace the location of a suspect who may be on the run. That is proving handy in cases from drug busts to matrimonial disputes. While the policy at AT&T's long-distance unit predates the 1984 breakup of the Bell System, the wireless policy is a carryover from the freewheeling McCaw Cellular Communications Inc., which AT&T acquired in 1994. Mr. Landis says customers of the wireless unit are made aware of the no-notice policy in subscriber agreements; if customers ask whether their records have been subpoenaed, he says, the company will usually tell them. Other fast-growing cell companies have similar policies. The problem is that consumers tend to overlook any upfront warnings and assume that the privacy of their phone records is protected by law. There has long been a certain disconnect between the law and consumer beliefs about phone records. In the late 1970s, the U.S. Supreme Court held that consumers don't have an absolute right to control their phone records because they essentially amount to business records of the phone company, and by using the phone, consumers are implicitly consenting to the use of their records in public proceedings. Eventually, in 1986, Congress passed an electronic-privacy law that requires phone companies to be in receipt of a subpoena before turning over records, at least to the government. In such cases, if they comply with that requirement, the companies are given absolute immunity from suits. Beefing Up Protections Some states have beefed up consumer protections. California decided that consumers should have at least an opportunity to object when their records are being pursued in litigation, requiring that notice be given in all civil cases, starting in the mid-1980s. More recently, some courts have started carving out special protections. Last year, a New York court held that a doctor had a right to object to the release of his phone records in a medical-malpractice suit, on the theory that the release would violate the doctor-patient privilege. Like AT&T's long-distance unit, some old-line phone companies maintain fairly progressive policies, and they have carried them over to their home-grown cellular subsidiaries. Bell Atlantic Corp., for instance, notifies both its local and cell customers via a form letter, which it usually mails within 48 hours of receiving a subpoena for records. While policies vary, many cell-phone companies apparently have decided there is nothing to be gained by going to the expense of notifying customers. Federal law, they note, doesn't require such notice. In most instances, they argue, people find out that their phone records are being pursued in civil cases through court rules that generally require the parties seeking them to notify the customer themselves. Requiring cell-phone companies to backstop such procedures with their own notices would simply add an unnecessary expense, entangle them in court cases and threaten to "make their principal business litigation as opposed to communications," says Albert Gidari, a Seattle lawyer who advises a number of wireless concerns. Other big cell-phone companies, including AirTouch Communications Inc., of San Francisco, and Nextel Communications Inc., McLean, Va, also say they generally don't notify customers. "If we told consumers we would let them know and then we didn't notify them, because of the volume, that could be a violation of trust," says an AirTouch spokesman. In Denver, the phone flap emerged in the case of a white supremacist accused of murder. The defendant had confessed in a jailhouse interview with TV journalist Julie Hayden. A public defender for the accused sought to exclude the confession, alleging that it had been obtained after the reporter was tipped off by investigators, who had then conspired with the reporter to illegally extract the confession. Last November, the public defender faxed AT&T's wireless unit a subpoena for Ms. Hayden's phone records. The company obliged. Despite court rules, the defense lawyer failed to notify the prosecution, much less Ms. Hayden or her employer. The station first learned of the subpoena at a hearing last month at which the public defender suddenly produced Ms. Hayden's phone records in the process of cross-examining a police detective on the case. At that point, lawyers for the broadcaster rushed to court and demanded a hearing. Subsequently, State District Court Judge Federico Alvarez excluded the records from evidence. He did so, he said, because the TV station wasn't notified, allowing an end run around a state law protecting journalists' confidential sources. 'Administrative Convenience' A. Bruce Jones, a Denver attorney for the TV station, says his clients "were taken aback that their records could be obtained that easily." He adds that the carrier's actions seemed to be guided by "administrative convenience." In a recent letter to AT&T's wireless unit, McGraw-Hill's general counsel, Kenneth Vittor, asked the unit to adopt a more customer-friendly notice policy; if nothing else, he said, it would be a step in the right direction "simply to give notice" to phone subscribers when their records are requested by a third party. Mr. Landis of AT&T says the company has commissioned an in-depth study of its "subpoena compliance" and "customer notification" policies, in deference to McGraw-Hill's request and expects to complete it soon. He adds: "We certainly place a very high premium on meeting the concerns and needs of our customers." Some experts suggest that consumers make privacy of their phone records a bargaining chip in arranging service. Over the years, some media companies have attempted to privately negotiate a heads-up from carriers in the event their records are subpoenaed, for example. "It all goes back to the basic contract that flows to any customer," says Jane Kirtley, executive director of the Washington-based Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. "The onus is really on [the customer] to find out what the company is prepared to do." Some carriers, she adds, are "very proud" of their privacy policies and "consider it a selling point." Yet ordinary consumers don't appear to have much clout in winning control over their records. Mr. Gidari, the Seattle lawyer, says some companies will agree in advance to withhold records from former employees of customers, to avoid misuse of that information. But "that is a very rare or limited exception, really intended more for the protection of the company that set up the account," he says. --Nicole Harris contributed to this article. Copyright 1999 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 22:42:12 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Ericsson, Qualcomm Settle Phone Standard Dispute By Paul de Bendern STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - Telecom equipment makers Ericsson of Sweden and Qualcomm of the U.S. announced the settlement of a patent dispute Thursday, paving the way for a global wireless standard and boosting Ericsson's position in the U.S. mobile phone market. Ericsson and Qualcomm struck a deal allowing the Swedish manufacturer to buy Qualcomm's terrestial CDMA wireless infrastructure business including two of its research and development facilities. "Under the agreements, Ericsson and Qualcomm agree to jointly support a single world CDMA standard," Ericsson said. CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) is a telephone standard developed by Qualcomm and mainly used in the United States. Ericsson shares soared 10 percent or 17.5 crowns to 193 by 1100 GMT, helping push up the Stockholm bourse indices. Ericsson's growth potential has improved as the group can now address the whole global market for mobile infrastructure and produce CDMA-standard mobile phones, a technology accounting for half the U.S. market, Ericsson said in a statement. Ericsson, the world's third biggest maker of mobile phones, said earlier this week trading conditions had deteriorated in the first quarter, confirming a profit warning last December. The agreement helps settle an international trade conflict looming over the future of wireless communications by solving the debate over which standard will be used for the next generation of mobile phones, known as 3G. Third generation equipment is intended to carry digital traffic such as Internet messages at high speeds. "Ericsson, through its agreement with Qualcomm -- a pioneer in developing CDMA technologies -- now has complete 3G competence," Ericsson Chief Executive Sven-Christer Nilsson said. "We are ideally positioned to support any operator anywhere in the world to migrate to 3G regardless of technology heritage or technological choice." The deal will allow Ericsson, which does not produce mobile phones with the CDMA standard, to boost its U.S. market position by producing CDMA phones as well as CDMA infrastructure. San Diego-based Qualcomm will get access to some of Ericsson's patents to CDMA's rival technology GSM, or Global System for Mobile Communications, the worlds largest mobile standard, and the one favored by European companies. Ericsson's Finnish rival Nokia, the world's biggest maker of mobile phones and a major backer of GSM, does not make CDMA network equipment but does make CDMA handsets for the U.S. market. "This gives us great opportunities to grab a larger part of the U.S. market, and within a couple of years we expect CDMA related technology to make up 15 percent of the total world market," Ericsson spokesman Erik Osterberg said. Companies that would benefit from the expansion of CDMA include U.S. equipment suppliers Motorola, Lucent Technologies and Qualcomm, which stands to earn hefty royalties on the technology. Canada's Nortel and South Korea's Samsung are also CDMA equipment providers. China has signaled it may open its market to CDMA technology. Ericsson and Qualcomm will support approval of a single CDMA 3G standard by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), the global telcoms body, the U.S. telecom industry body TIA and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI). "Qualcomm and Ericsson believe that rapid adoption of the single CDMA standard is in the best interests of the industry and allows each operator to select which mode of operation to deploy based on marketplace needs," Ericsson said. The agreement settles the litigation and provides cross licensing of intellectual property rights for all CDMA technologies, including cdmaOne, WCDMA and CDMA2000. (Additional reporting by Salomon Bekele) ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Short Course: Cost Estimation and Economic Evaluation Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 19:15:41 -0800 On June 14-17, 1999, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "Cost Estimation and Economic Evaluation of Projects", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructor is Donald S. Remer, PhD, Oliver C. Field Professor of Engineering, Harvey Mudd College of Engineering and Science, and Partner, Claremont Consulting Group. Rapidly advancing technology, increasing project complexity, and competitive pressures demand better cost estimation and economic evaluation of projects, processes, products, or services, whether developing new ones or improving existing ones. Successful engineers, scientists, and managers must use modern cost estimating and economic evaluation techniques to select the optimum mix of projects for today's cost-conscious environment. Accurate project cost estimates and investment evaluations are critical to staying competitive and optimizing organizational resources. This course develops the skills needed to prepare, review, approve, supervise, monitor, and/or use cost estimates and economic evaluations in research, development, design, manufacturing, marketing, and management. The course also discusses how to produce accurate cost estimates and investment evaluations to avoid large cost overruns or unsatisfactory investment returns, whether the project budget is a few thousand dollars or millions of dollars. The course fee is $1395, which includes extensive course materials. Course materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For additional information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/ This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ From: support@sellcom.com Subject: Re: KSU-less System Recommendations Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 04:00:08 GMT Organization: www.sellcom.com Reply-To: support@ spake thusly and wrote: > we already use a wireless LAN in the house (Proxim Symphony) and I'm a > little concerned about interference. Does anyone have any > recommendations or advice? Know of any reviews of products on the > market, especially good comparison tables? Thanks! I have been told that it would not be a problem. I have two of the 2420 Gigasets operating about 15 feet from each other with no interference that I can detect. The Gigaset is real handy with the intercom feature between handsets and the wall mountable charger base units. Steve http://www.sellcom.com Telecommunications and internet networking hardware Cyclades / Siemens / Y2K ODIU support / Zoom Modems & Cameras AMEX/VISA/MC/Optima With SSL Secure online ordering New 2.4ghz cordless phone at www.sellcom.com/awesome ------------------------------ From: Michael N. Marcus Subject: Re: KXU-less System Recommendations Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1999 17:20:18 -0500 I've written several reports on KSUless systems for Teleconnect magazine. They may be in their online archives (www.telecomlibrary.com) and they were available in the library for the Consumer Electronics Forum on CompuServe. That forum has been absorbed by the Video & Home Electronics Forum (GO VIDEO), but the reports should be available in the phone equipment library within the Video etc. Forum. I think the most recent report has the file name of KSULES.95. There is also some general material on KSUless vs KSU-based system on my Website, www.ablecomm.com/faqredo.htm ; and specific info on the Nortel and TMC products at www.ablecomm.com/consumer.htm Michael N. Marcus AbleComm, Inc. www.ablecomm.com=20 www.phone-system.com www.store.yahoo.com/panasonic-ablecomm www.connect-9.com=20 ------------------------------ From: Seymour Dupa Subject: Re: What is the Number For 1000 cps Test Tone? Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc. Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 11:43:17 GMT Call (216) 641-9883 to get what you want. Stan Buskus wrote: > I want to test a POTS line for noise and db levels. A long time ago, > each CO had it's own test tone generator and quiet line termination. All > one had to do was dial XXX-9994 and XXX-9995 (or something like that). I > called Ameritech to get the test numbers but I was told it was > propietary. Does anyone know what numbers they use for testing? If You Always Do the Things You've Done, You'll Always Have the Things You Got. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 09:43:34 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Local Call Dialing Question For areas which have overlay area codes, there exists a ruling (FCC?) that local calls have to be NPA+7D (i.e. no more 7D). At least part of the thinking is the situation where a "baby Bell" has been doing business and the system is making room for competing companies with their own prefixes. Using NPA+7D removes the "stigma" where such competition has to have most or all of its prefixes in the 2nd (overlay) area code while the "baby Bell" gets to have most or all of its prefixes in the older, more familiar area code. I live and work in eastern Mary- land, in area 410 with 443 overlaid on it (those places which stayed in 301 now have area code 240 as an overlay), and all local calls originating in Maryland are now NPA+7D (some of them changed to that scheme as far back as 1990). I have had this available: 1. any call within +1 can be made as 1+NPA+7D. 2. any local call can be made as NPA+7D. 3. if no overlay exists in my area code, any local call within the area code can be made as 7D. Maryland had this before the overlays. Allowing this does not forbid the familiar 7D local call unless: 1. overlay is put in; 2. area code requirement is put in for local calls to other geographic area codes. This even exists for local calls from Delaware to other states (all along the Pa. border and a few scattered places at Md. border), to ease up on restrictions on prefix assignments in those other states. (For example, if 610 area in Pa. was to duplicate prefixes existing in Wilmington, Del., it previously had to assign them outside the Wilmington calling area, which does cross into Pa.) Old equipment might be a reason not for having 1+NPA+7D available for local calls, right? (having to go through extra equipment before coming back into your local calling area) But the problem of reprogramming (traveling) equipment (because of changing from local to toll or vice versa) has been written up in this Digest before. ------------------------------ From: Pat Noziska Subject: Re: "No Solicitation" Residential Phone Feature Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 08:22:37 -0800 Organization: aracnet.com David T. wrote: > I live in Salt Lake City, where USW has recently rolled this out as well, I > haven't paid too much attention, but here's what I understand about it... > >1) How (if at all), from a technical standpoint, does this feature > >differ from Anonymous Call Blocking for Caller ID subscribers? > It doesn't really, from what I've read, you can "program" up to 20 (or so ) > numbers from callers you want to always get through. All other callers will > get an intercept saying something like "this # does not accept telemarketing > calls, please take them of your call list, otherwise, press 1 > to be connected" I guess it hadn't dawned on me that a BOC would come up with a semi-kludge like this and call it "No solicitation." Forgetting for a moment the nagging Out-of-Area problem, I envisioned a more elegant solution whereby there would be an SCP database of known solicitors that would dynamically grow (new solicitors would initially get through, but not for long), and TCAP/INAP would filter those calls out at the CO. Silly me. :-) > One TV News blurp I saw on it said that yes, telemarketers could still get > through, but the assumption is that they won't press 1. (Of course, those > autodialers would never get through for sure). Another interesting thing I > read is that it is only active from 7 or 8AM until 9PM, as Fed > law states that no telemarketing calls can be made after 9PM. Apparently > this timeframe cannot be changed. IMHO, the service really ought to be called "Exclusive Caller List" or "Approved Callers" (now you know why I'm not in Marketing. :-) ). But naming it "No solicitation," while an astute marketing hook to lure subscribers, is a bit deceptive. As someone interested in user-friendliness, I don't like the idea of non-solicitor callers not on my "approved" list having to affirm they're not a solicitor by jumping through hoops. I already have enough people with unlisted numbers frustrated at me because they don't know that they need to dial *82 to get past my Anonymous Call Blocking. ------------------------------ From: juhave@zdnetmail.com (Juha Veijalainen) Subject: First UMTS licences granted in Finland Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 23:06:19 GMT Finnish authorities granted the first UMTS mobile system licenses to four applicants. Two of them - Sonera and Radiolinja - are nationwide GSM operators, the third, Telia from Sweden, operates currently some city networks using GSM 1800. Fourth license went to a consortium of local phone companies working with international companies. To avoid EU - USA trade war (EU - Qualcomm trade war...), Finnish authorities did not specify the technology to be used, though it is assumed all licensees will use UMTS (W-CDMA) Juha Veijalainen, Helsinki, Finland, http://www.iki.fi/juhave/ Some random words: bomb,steganography,cryptography,reindeer ** Mielipiteet omiani ** Opinions personal, facts suspect ** ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #40 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 29 20:00:05 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id UAA11976; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 20:00:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 20:00:05 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903300100.UAA11976@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #41 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Mar 99 22:00:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 41 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Epidemic Virus Infects Corporate E-mail (Monty Solomon) Just How Destructive Will 'Melissa' Virus Be? (Monty Solomon) Problems With Subscriber Line Carrier (Tad Cook) ACN 9-1: Battle Over the Internet's Future (Jay Robert Hauben) Telecom Update (Canada) #176, March 29, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) AT&T Selling Language Line (Greg Monti) Followup on Free Computer Scam (Patrick Townson) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 00:59:14 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Epidemic Virus Infects Corporate E-mail http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2233030,00.html Epidemic virus infects corporate e-mail By Mary Jo Foley, Sm@rt Reseller, and Lisa M. Bowman, ZDNN March 26, 1999 6:07 PM PT A number of Microsoft Corp. Outlook/Exchange customers -- including Microsoft itself, as well as Intel Corp. -- are being hit hard by a macro virus that is replicating infected pornography-related information throughout corporate email systems. The virus, which was identified by Network Associates Inc. (Nasdaq:NETA) as 'Melissa,' originated in Western Europe and was first discovered on the alt.sex newsgroup. Computer security experts said the virus wreaked havoc with corporate e-mail as it sped across the Internet on Friday. "The proliferation of this virus is something we've never seen before," said Srivats Sampath, a general manager at Network Associates. He said that 60,000 people at one company had been affected. He refused to identify the company. "Because there's so much e-mail passing through a server, it's basically taking down the servers," Sampath said. He added that twenty large companies were affected by late afternoon -- including as many as 60,000 in one company. Microsoft e-mail suspended At Microsoft (Nasdaq:MSFT), the company suspended all incoming and outgoing Internet mail Friday. "We're a victim, like any other company on the outside," of this virus, said a Microsoft spokesman. The spokesman said Microsoft's product support division has been in contact all day via e-mail and phone with Microsoft's customers and partners, alerting them about the virus. "We made an IT (information technology) decision in the early afternoon and agreed it was pro-customer and pro-partner to shut down our Internet mail portion. As soon as we feel tight on this, probably in the next few hours, we will turn this back on and process all the mail in the queue." At least one division of Intel Corp. (Nasdaq:INTC) also reported problems resulting from the macro virus. A public relations spokesperson acknowledged that some of the company's e-mail servers had gone down as a result. A representative at Waggener Edstrom, Microsoft's public relations agency, which also was hit by the virus, according to several sources, acknowledged problems caused by a 'malicious macro virus.' Melissa's sophisticated bite The Melissa virus propagates via e-mail. Attached to the e-mail is a Word file that, if opened, launches a macro that replicates a message to the first 50 names in the recipient's Outlook address book. The subject line reads: "important message from," followed by a user name. The body consists of a text message that says, "Here is that document you asked for... don't show anyone else;-)." The infected documents reportedly contain porn Web site information. The virus specifically affects Outlook and does not trigger the multiple e-mails on other messaging platforms, such as Lotus Notes. However, people using e-mail software other than Outlook may be able to spread affected files by sending them to Outlook users, experts said. McAfee added the virus to its virus database Friday. More information on the virus is can be found on McAfee's site. "It sounds pretty sophisticated," said Peter Deegan of Woody's Office Watch, who'd been notified of the virus but hadn't seen it. He said the virus sounded unusual because of its effect on mail servers. Usually, such viruses attack individual machines, but this one apparently can overload mail services by sending out repeated messages. People cannot get the virus by merely opening up a message, only by opening the attached document. "Always be careful of anything that arrives by e-mail," he said. The virus also appears to turn off Office's macro protection, which could leave users more vulnerable to future viruses. After cleansing their machines of the virus, those affected might need to reactivate the macro protection. In another twist, the virus causes a specific phrase to pop up when the time of day, matches the date (for example, at 3:26 on March 26). The phrase reads: "Twenty-two points plus triple word score, plus 50 points for using all my letters. Game's over. I'm out of here." Right now, that feature is benign, but security experts say it could be used to delete files if a malicious hacker creates another version of the virus. Word 97, Word 2000 vulnerability Antivirus software vendor TrendMicro noted on its Web site that the so-called W97M_Melissa virus can attack via both Word 97 and Word 2000 documents. If the virus attacks via Word 2000, says TrendMicro, "it will lower the security setting to the lowest level by modifying the registry and will disable the Word menu commands (MacroSecurity) which allows the user to reinstate security settings." "A minimum of 20 major companies been infected. This is spreading faster than any virus we've seen before, because we've only seen a few email-activated viruses in the wild before this," noted Dan Schrader, director of product marketing. Schrader says the best way for companies to stamp out Melissa is to run virus protection software at the server, not the desktop, level. TrendMicro says it already updated all of its products to detect this virus as of today. The company also is offering a free service on its Web site, allowing administrators and customers to scan their machines for any virus, including Melissa. Additional reporting by ZDNN's Charles Cooper and Sm@rt Reseller's Deborah Gage. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Just How Destructive Will 'Melissa' Virus Be? Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 18:16:00 -0500 http://www.thestandard.net/articles/mediagrok_display/0,1185,4012,00.html Just How Destructive Will 'Melissa' Virus Be? Covering the computer-virus beat can be hazardous to a reporter's credibility. The trick is to balance a writer's duty to inform (and warn) consumers about an attack without pushing the panic button unnecessarily. Complicating matters are the self-serving antivirus companies, which like to see reporters err on the side of sensationalism to drive up sales. With Friday and weekend reports of a new e-mail attachment virus dubbed "Melissa," the question is, should we be scared? The virus reportedly replicates by sending itself as a Word attachment to 50 people in the recipient's address book. While most people have learned not to open attachments, this message is titled "Important Message from [friend's name]," to better trick users. And early reports show it has worked pretty well. Most outlets included a quote from antivirus company Network Associates calling "Melissa" the fastest-spreading virus yet. MSNBC's Bob Sullivan gave even greater credence to a public warning from Carnegie Mellon's Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT), which has only given such warnings twice in ten years. A CERT manager told Sullivan, "We're getting so many reports from across the world, that we know this is going to be a huge problem come Monday." Despite all the warnings, most outlets were quick to say that the virus doesn't damage most computers it infects, but can overwhelm mail servers with all the messages it creates. The New York Times' Matt Richtel said computers have been hit at Charles Schwab, Intel, Lucent and the Department of Energy. As for Melissa's origin, Richtel said it might actually be an "Internet marketing ploy that spun out of control," since the attachment includes a list of porn sites. One expert says if the virus was meant to do damage, the culprit could have included a program to delete data. News.com's Stephen Shankland said the virus was similar to the "Share Fun" virus of 1997, but more robust, and quoted a Network Associates expert as estimating Melissa has infected "hundreds of thousands of computers." E-mail Virus Anxiety Increases http://www.msnbc.com/news/253803.asp Super-Fast Computer Virus Heads Into the Workweek http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/03/biztech/articles/29virus.html E-mail Virus Spreading Rapidly http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,34334,00.html?st.ne.fd.gif.e Don't Mess With 'Melissa' http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/18783.html ------------------------------ Subject: Problems With Subscriber Line Carrier Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 18:21:33 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) (from the Chicago Tribune Technology Notebook Column) By Jon Van and Andrew Zajac, Chicago Tribune Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Mar. 29--OPTING FOR ADDITIONAL PHONE LINES MAY JUST CAUSE A SPLITTING HEADACHE: When customers call Ameritech Corp. to order extra lines, most probably think they are actually going to get extra lines, but they don't. What they get is a switch installed on their premises that splits their existing line into separate parts, with each fraction of the copper line acting like it was a separate line. Most customers may not understand this, but Nora O'Connor of Evanston does because she makes her living as an information technology consultant. So when her phone equipment started to malfunction after she had two new lines installed, she had a good idea what was wrong. "When the pair gain technology switch doesn't perform as it's supposed to, it diminishes signal quality," O'Connor said. "One symptom of this is that your answering machine won't pick up because the signal isn't strong enough to activate it." That's what was happening to O'Connor, who has heard about problems with pair gain technology before, and that's what she told the technician Ameritech sent to solve the problem. But the technician told her she was wrong, that the problem was with her answering machine. He advised she shop around for a new one, or, better yet, forget having an answering machine and buy Ameritech's voice mail service. This irked O'Connor, who pointed out that her equipment worked fine before she ordered extra lines and still works when used at her mother's house, which has only the one phone line. O'Connor was especially peeved that the technician treated her like a techno-fool who could be expected to believe any cock-and-bull story. "When it rained or snowed, I had no phone service at all," said O'Connor. "Ameritech has thousands of these Pair Gain Plus switches that just have lots of problems, but they won't acknowledge it." After a few weeks of escalating her complaints up Ameritech's chain of command, O'Connor finally found someone who agreed with her, and Ameritech sent out technicians to install new pairs of copper wires to provide the multiline service she pays for. "It took them about two hours to install the new lines, and now everything works just fine," O'Connor said. "This problem is fairly common, but most people don't realize what's wrong or know to ask for hardwired multiple lines instead of these problematic switches." ------------------------------ From: jrh29@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Jay Robert Hauben) Subject: ACN 9-1: Battle Over the Internet's Future Date: 29 Mar 1999 05:18:45 GMT Organization: Columbia University Amateur Computerist Vol 9 No 1 Battle Over the Future of the Internet http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/ACN9-1.txt On June 5, 1998 the US government issued a White Paper describing its intention to privatize the ownership, control and administration of the crucial elements of the Internet. These include the allocation of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, the allocation of Internet domain names, the maintenance of the Internet protocol and other numbers and parameters, the oversight of the protocol and standards development process, and the maintenance of the root name servers, especially the Authoritative root name server, all crucial to the existence and operation of the Internet. Privatization would represent a major change for the Internet and there has been an international fight over what should happen. The Amateur Computerist Vol 9 No 1 is a an examination of questions raised by the U.S. government's efforts to privatize the Internet. One question discussed in this issue is the proper role for governments in maintaining and scaling the Internet. The article, "The Role of Government in the Evolution of the Internet" first published in 1994, provides a description of the changing role that the U.S. government has played in the creation and development of the Internet. It raises the question of what role will government, both the U.S. government, and other governments around the world, need to play in the further development of the Internet in order for these networking developments to continue to grow and spread more broadly and widely. Another question discussed is, "The Internet: Public or Private?" In testimony submitted to Congress, in a proposal for a scientific research prototype to protect the Internet as an International Public Treasure, and in a letter to Congressman Tom Bliley, it is argued that the communications essence of the Internet requires public protection. Also historical perspective is provided in the first installment of an analysis of the MsgGroup mailing list that helped establish the foundation for the worldwide success of email and communication in general using the Internet. Another article documents some of the complexity in the battle that started as if it was over domain name allocation and administration but seems really over the control of the Internet itself. It is called, "Herding Cats and Sacred Cows". In it the author wonders what all the talk of 'governance' is really about and says he has "become a profound cynic about private-sector self governance." An article in the issue takes a long range look at the domain name system. Some history of telephone call naming and numbering is looked at to suggest that the domain name problems of today may have only a short life. The issue also contains reports from INET98 and the IFWP meeting in Geneva and letters from Congressman Tom Bliley to Ira Magaziner and U.S. Secretary of Commerce William Daley. The contents help broaden the basis to look at and understand what is at stake in the battle over the future of the Internet. The issue is available via email from: jrh@ais.org or ronda@panix.com It can also be accessed at: http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/ACN9-1.txt The individual articles are at: http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/acn9-1.articles/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 12:29:34 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #176, March 29, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 176: March 29, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Next Issue April 6 ** Ameritech Buys 20% of Bell Canada ** Ledcor and Vancouver Battle Over Rights-of-Way ** Onex, Telefonica Set Up Telecom Investment Fund ** TeleZone Sues Ottawa for $250 Million ** Ericsson to Buy Qualcomm CDMA Unit ** KPMG Canada to Merge With Arthur Andersen ** Telus Small Business Bundle Turned Down ** Bell Canada Testing Internet Payphones ** PIAC Says Consumers Left Behind in LD ** Celestica Buys Cabletron Manufacturing Business ** BCT.Telus Puts Internet Purchases on Phone Bills ** Axia to Buy Atlantic Netcom ** Videotron Seeks Telecom Partner ** Tacit, Traynor Join Nelligan Power ** Shaw Buys Nova Scotia Cableco ** APC Telecom Announces VOIP Service ** Last Chance for "Tips, Tricks and Traps" Offer ============================================================ NEXT ISSUE APRIL 6: Telecom Update will take a holiday April 5; our next issue will be on Tuesday, April 6. AMERITECH BUYS 20% OF BELL CANADA: See Telecom Update Extra at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up175b.html ** The Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union has reserved judgment on the deal, but warns that it may bring "Americanization" of jobs. LEDCOR AND VANCOUVER BATTLE OVER RIGHTS-OF-WAY: Ledcor Industries has asked the CRTC to block the City of Vancouver from removing or disrupting Ledcor's fiber lines crossing 18 city streets. Ledcor and the City have been unable to agree on terms; Vancouver says Ledcor is trespassing. Ledcor has applied to the Commission to resolve the impasse. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1999/8690/L8- 01.htm ONEX, TELEFONICA SET UP TELECOM INVESTMENT FUND: Toronto- based Onex Corp. has joined with Telefonica, a major communications player in Spain and Latin America, to launch a US$1-Billion fund for investment in world telecommunications. Onex has widely distributed holdings with 1998 sales of C$8.8 Billion. (See Telecom Update #132) TELEZONE SUES OTTAWA FOR $250 MILLION: TeleZone has sued the Federal Government for $250 Million, saying Ottawa unfairly rejected TeleZone's bid for a PCS license in 1995. TeleZone says Ottawa ignored its own published rules in awarding the licenses. ERICSSON TO BUY QUALCOMM CDMA UNIT: Ericsson has agreed to purchase Qualcomm's CDMA infrastructure and R&D operations. The deal ends a two-year patent dispute and may open the road to a common world standard for broadband (3G) wireless. KPMG CANADA TO MERGE WITH ARTHUR ANDERSEN: KPMG Canada, which includes a significant telecom-related consulting practice, has cut its ties with KPMG International and intends to merge with the Canadian wing of Arthur Andersen. TELUS SMALL BUSINESS BUNDLE TURNED DOWN: The CRTC has nixed a proposed Telus Communications promotion which would have bundled business lines, SmarTouch features, directory listings, and phone equipment. The Commission says equipment may not be bundled with local service. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/internet/1999/8045/04/o99-0260.htm BELL CANADA TESTING INTERNET PAYPHONES: Bell has launched a six-month market trial of a Public Internet Access service in "a number of diverse locations." Multimedia terminals will accept credit cards and Bell QuickChange/LaPuce cards for the 25ents per minute charge. http://www.crtc.gc.ca:80/eng/proc_rep/telecom/1999/8740/b2- 6331.htm PIAC SAYS CONSUMERS LEFT BEHIND IN LD: A study by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre says that in 1997 almost half of Canadian households were paying the same long distance rates as they were in 1992, when competition was introduced. PIAC advocates "information programs and better monitoring." CELESTICA BUYS CABLETRON MANUFACTURING BUSINESS: Celestica, an electronics manufacturer based in Toronto, has agreed to take over equipment manufacturing for New Hampshire-based Cabletron Systems, which makes data networking equipment. BCT.TELUS PUTS INTERNET PURCHASES ON PHONE BILLS: BCT.Telus, in collaboration with ECharge Corp, is offering to enable Canadian businesses to receive payment for Internet sales via the customer's phone bill. The service, which collects payment using a 1-900 number, would be available to Canadian Internet users connecting to the Internet over a telephone line. AXIA TO BUY ATLANTIC NETCOM: Calgary-based Axia NetMedia has agreed to buy Atlantic Netcom, a Halifax-based cabling supplier. (See Telecom Update #170) VIDEOTRON SEEKS TELECOM PARTNER: CEO Andre Chagnon says Videotron is seeking a partner who wishes to use Videotron's Quebec-wide network to provide telecom services. "All those who would want to use our local network ... should talk to us," Chagnon says. TACIT, TRAYNOR JOIN NELLIGAN POWER: Telecom lawyers Chris Tacit and Stephanie Traynor have joined the Nelligan Power law firm in Ottawa. SHAW BUYS NOVA SCOTIA CABLECO: Shaw Communications is buying Nova Scotia-based Access Cable and a majority interest in Access Communications for $167 Million. The transaction affects about 140,000 subscribers. APC TELECOM ANNOUNCES VOIP SERVICE: Toronto-area reseller APC Telecommunications says it is working with NetSpeak and PSINet to provide Voice-Over-IP services. APC has changed its name to Innofone.Com. (See Telecom Update #159) LAST CHANCE FOR "TIPS, TRICKS AND TRAPS" OFFER: Telemanagement's Special Offer to send a free copy of "Tips, Tricks and Traps" to all new subscribers expires tomorrow. ** "Tips, Tricks and Traps" includes 22 reports and resources for telecom professionals by Ian Angus, Lis Angus, and Henry Dortmans. ** To subscribe to Telemanagement (and receive Tips, Tricks and Traps) call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225 or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html. HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 21:55:33 -0600 From: Greg Monti Subject: AT&T Selling Language Line According to a New York Times story dated March 25, 1999, posted on the Pointcast news service, AT&T Corporation will sell its over-the-phone language interpretation service, AT&T Language Line, to an affiliate of Providence Equity Partners, Inc., of Providence, Rhode Island. Language Line, based in Monterrey, California, has sales of over $70 million a year and interprets 140 languages. The brief notes that Language Line will be AT&T's and Providence Equity's preferred supplier of interpretation services. Greg Monti Dallas, Texas, USA gmonti@mindspring.com http://www.mindspring.com/~gmonti ------------------------------ From: Patrick Townson Subject: Followup on Free Computer Scam Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 18:53:19 -0600 Last week I mentioned a new scam on the net which involved receiving a free computer in exchange for answering questions posed by a research firm. Shortly after that item appeared, I received email about it from Johnny Collie, the person in Muskegon, MI operating the web page via which, for a twenty dollar 'good faith' payment, one could register to receive the free computers. His answer appears below, then more of my comments follow. -----Original Message----- From: Jccollie@aol.com To: PTownson@csi.com Cc: jccollie@getonefreepc.com Date: Thursday, March 25, 1999 10:57 PM Subject: Re: Participation in Your Research Program >Sender: Jccollie@aol.com >Received: from imo24.mx.aol.com (imo24.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.68]) > by hpdmgaaa.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.1) with ESMTP id XAA14077 > for ; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 23:55:58 -0500 (EST) >From: Jccollie@aol.com >Received: from Jccollie@aol.com > by imo24.mx.aol.com (IMOv19.3) id fTEFa00355; > Thu, 25 Mar 1999 23:54:37 +1900 (EST) >Message-ID: <245df0a9.36fb130d@aol.com> >Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 23:54:37 EST >To: ptownson@compuserve.com >Cc: jccollie@getonefreepc.com >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Subject: Re: Participation in Your Research Program >Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 13 > You have went to a lot of trouble for basically nothing. We are a legal > business in the state of Michigan. We have been in business for 17 years > and have used the common law name of National Research, Inc. We > didn't see any need to change. > > Our company is registered under the name of International Historical > Research, Inc. > We are a legal company who have been commissioned to do this study on > computers. We have already been paid. We are not trying to rip you off > for $20.00. > This program is open to the public and we welcome all. The reason for the > $20.00 enrollment fee is for sincerity and we had to taken on extra > employees to handle the shipping and survey materials. > > We appreciate your feedback on our website. Tomorrow in the FAQ we will > add when the computers will be given away. > After we have enrolled 12,000 applicants we will closed down the website. > This program just started this week and the response has been slow. Due to > this fact you have qualified for one of the free computer. If we do not > receive an email from you within two days telling us not to refund your > enrollment fee we will send a refund back to your credit card. Thanks for > your interest. > John Maybe John would tell us *which* computer manufacturer commissioned his study; if he regards that information as confidential then I suppose he is within his rights to not say. His client may have instructed him to not give out their name; that is quite commmon in surveys. Perhaps in that case his client will email me direct; I absolutely promise to keep their confidence, but if this is all legal and above board, I will gladly print something here. John says the twenty dollars will pay for the extra employees to be hired to help with the processsing and shipping. Normally, the fee charged to the client includes this. I think when the client, if there is one, contracted with John's company, it anticipated all these costs in the fee which John says above has already been paid. I have to wonder why the process of shipping out the computer must wait until all twelve thousand inquiries have been received (and paid for; he allows for money orders to be mailed to his address if the person does not want to use a credit card). Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to stagger the shipments, a few each day as inquiries were received? He is going to overwhelm the little local office of United Parcel Service by dumping twenty or thirty thousand fragile shipments on them at one time 'in a few months' or whenever he decides to send out the computers (one box) and monitors (another box) and assorted attachments if any (still a third box). But the biggest puzzle of all: why wouldn't a company in business for seventeen years have a listed telephone number in their community? Yes, I know 555-1212 these days is contracted out also and some say its database is woefully behind times ... but seventeen years? Why no entry for the company in the Muskegon City Directory, the Muskegon County 1998 Business Directory or the records of the Muskegon Economic Growth Alliance, an organization working to improve the general economic and business climate in the town, which ranks some- where above East St. Louis, MO and Ford Heights, IL but not too far above them? No John, I did not 'basically waste my time for nothing'. I hope I made a small contribution to the net. And by the way, by including your street address on the web page for people who 'preferred to send you a money order or cash' you made it easy to track this down. Had you insisted on credit cards, it would have been much harder. At least next time, for God's sake, use a maildrop/remail service or a regular post office box (as long as you don't register it in a company name for the purpose of soliciting the public, so it too can be traced) as a way to collect your loot. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #41 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Mon Mar 29 21:31:13 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id VAA15671; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 21:31:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 21:31:13 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903300231.VAA15671@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #42 TELECOM Digest Mon, 29 Mar 99 21:31:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 42 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Welcome to FreeWay! (Mike Pollock) Telephone Trips For Travellers? (David E. Bernholdt) Anyone Want a Privately Owned Internet? (shanen@my-dejanews.com) I Need DOS Drivers For Dialogic D/21D (Terry Watkins) Excellent Employment Opportunity Immediately Available (Marc Goldstein) Re: Watch Out! Sprint's Done it to the Consumer Again (Joseph Norton) Re: Watch Out! Sprint's Done it to the Consumer Again (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... (James Wyatt) Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... (Jim Youll) Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... (Christopher W. Boone) VFX 40 ESC Plus 4 Sale (Al Niven) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Pollock Subject: Welcome to FreeWay! Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 20:00:59 -0500 Organization: It's A Mike! Hey, look what I finally got! ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, March 26, 1999 11:06 AM Subject: Welcome to FreeWay! > Dear Mike, > > WELCOME TO FREEWAY -- America's first TOTALLY FREE long distance > calling service! > > Thanks again for signing up! Here's your FreeWay PIN and the > toll-free access number. You will also receive your membership > card in the mail within ten days. If you do not receive your > card, please send us an email at service@broadpoint.com. > > TOLL FREE ACCESS NUMBER: 1-877-XXXXXXX > CONFIDENTIAL PIN*: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX > > * Please see important PIN confidentiality notice below > > To use FreeWay, simply dial the toll-free access number and > enter your PIN at the prompt, followed by the pound "#" sign. > Then enter the number you wish to call, area code first (no "1"), > followed by the pound "#" sign. After every message that you > hear, just press "*" for another message or "#" to complete your > call. For each message you hear, you earn two FREE minutes of > long distance calling. TRY IT NOW! It's easy, fun and FREE. > > > HERE'S HOW YOUR STARTER MEMBERSHIP WORKS: > > Your starter membership on FreeWay guarantees you a minimum of > two full hours of free long distance calling per month! That's > double the total amount of long distance used by the average > person in the United States. And, as we work together to help > FreeWay grow, we'll be able to provide you with even more value > and free long distance calling time. Keep in mind that the two > hours are available to each and every FreeWay member in your > household, so if your other family members haven't yet signed > up, now's the time! > > Here's how it works. If you use up all of your free minutes > for the month (the vast majority of our members don't), you > will hear a special message the next time you call into FreeWay. > Then, be on the look-out for an email from FreeWay letting you > know when your PIN is reactivated and ready to go for another > two hours of free calling! > > > IMPORTANT: PIN CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > Please keep your FreeWay PIN strictly confidential. This is > important for several reasons. First, we don't want you to miss > out on any special values, discounts, free samples, and prizes > that are intended JUST FOR YOU. Second, if you share your PIN, > you won't be able to take full advantage of your monthly minutes. > Finally, it is important that our sponsors, who make the free > long distance possible, be able to send the right messages to > the right people. No one, not even other family members or close > friends, should use your FreeWay PIN. If you know others who > would like to use FreeWay, just send them to our website > (www.broadpoint.com) where they can sign-up to obtain their own > PIN. > > Please note that in order to protect our members and ensure that > we can continue to provide high-quality free long distance > service and other great values, we must suspend service if our > system detects that a PIN has been used by more than one person. > We thank you in advance for your support in helping to make > FreeWay successful for you and for all of our members. > > > FREEWAY OFFERS YOU MORE THAN JUST FREE LONG DISTANCE! > > FreeWay just keeps getting better and better! We are continually > working to provide our members with additional valuable benefits. > > Here are a few examples: > > >> Special member discounts and promotions - We are constantly > working with our sponsors to provide special promotions and > discounts on quality products and services available only to > FreeWay members. The more you take advantage of them, the > more you will help FreeWay succeed, and the more value we'll > be able to provide to you! When doing so, be sure to tell > the advertisers that FreeWay sent you! > > >> Convenient interactive features - If you hear a FreeWay ad for > a particular product or service that you're interested in, you > can simply press a button on your phone to: > > - Connect directly with the sponsor to learn more, or even > place an order. Press another button to return to FreeWay > at any time. Of course, you don't lose any free time you've > earned while talking to our sponsors. > > - Have FreeWay send you an informative email with an internet > link directly to the advertiser's website. No time to talk > to the advertiser now? No problem! > > - Request brochures or free samples (when offered) which are > automatically sent to your address - without even having to > talk to anyone. > > Again, the more you take advantage of these convenient features, > the more you will help FreeWay succeed. > > >> Convenient website shopping mall - Soon, you will be able to > browse all of the special values and promotions available to > FreeWay members, conveniently indexed on our website > (www.broadpoint.com). Something catch your interest, but no > time to call? No problem! Check-it out on the website at your > leisure. > > >> Exciting new FREE communications services - Soon, we will > extend FreeWay to include free international, wireless > (cellular and PCS) and even video-telephone calling. > Stay tuned! > > Finally, from all of us at BroadPoint, thank you again for > signing up for FreeWay. We hope you will enjoy the service, and > we know that we can count on you to help make FreeWay a success. > We look forward to any comments you may have as we seek to > continually improve the value and convenience we provide to our > members - just send us an email at comments@broadpoint.com. > > Sincerely, > > The BroadPoint Member Services Team [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I just now filled out an application to get a pin of my own. It can't hurt to try it out. Please report any experiences or unusual situations which occur, if any. PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: bernhold@npac.syr.edu Subject: Telephone Trips For Travellers? Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 15:10:36 -0500 From: David E. Bernholdt My wife and I both travel a lot on business. Usually one is home while the other is on the road, but occasionally we're both away in different places. We like to talk to each other one or more times per day (and it often takes multiple calls to connect, because the other person may be out of the office or not have arrived home yet). We also need to check voicemail at work a couple of times a day, and occasionally actually talk to people there. Finally, I frequently spend 1+ hours per day online via my ISP when I'm on the road. To date, we've been making most of these calls from pay phones or hotel rooms with our MCI calling card, and I use my ISP's 10 cent/min toll-free access number. My ISP is shutting down, so I have to find a new way to handle data calls and I'm annoyed with MCI for other reasons and happy to dump them. So I'm looking for alternatives. There are both short calls, where the per-call surchages drive costs up and longer calls where the per-minute rates dominate, and it seems like I ought to be able to do better than I am with MCI. Oh yeah, and we don't have cellphones at the moment -- except for AT&T's Digital One Rate the roaming fees would make it worse than land-lines, as far as I've been able to determine. And unfortunately AT&T's service isn't (yet?) available in this area. So I'm open to suggestions! Here's an estimate of our calling patterns while we're on the road (probably 1 wk/month each, on average): Call To Times/Day Minutes/Day Office voicemail 2 5 Colleagues at work 1 10 Spouse at work or home 4 60 (probably 2 coversations in 4 tries) ISP 1 60-120 Thanks for any suggestions. I'll summarize for the list. David E. Bernholdt | Email: bernhold@npac.syr.edu Northeast Parallel Architectures Center | Phone: +1 315 443 3857 111 College Place, Syracuse University | Fax: +1 315 443 1973 Syracuse, NY 13244-4100 | URL: http://www.npac.syr.edu ------------------------------ From: shanen@my-dejanews.com Subject: Anyone Want a Privately Owned Internet? Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 22:24:49 GMT Organization: Tokyo Institute of Polytechnics I hope that someone here will be able to offer guidance as to how I could help make this happen. I want to believe it's already a work in progress, but so far I haven't been able to dig anything up ... There are two parts to the system I'm searching for. The hardware part is a multi-frequency micro-cellular modem, and the software part is support for setting up lots of virtual channels and relaying packets. And the goal is nothing less than taking over the Internet -- rather than being owned by powerful centralized companies who want to control the information, WE would own it. The hardware venders would just freely compete in selling the best hardware at the best prices, and the network would be made of the hardware WE owned. The way I imagine it, I'd own my own computer with its own small multi- frequency transceiver. When I wanted to access a resource somewhere else on the net, my computer would contact neighboring computers and ask them to help set up a virtual circuit to the resource, and once the circuit was set up, the computers on that circuit would simply relay the data to my machine. In exchange, my machine would offer the same routing and relay services for those same machines. No need for global accounting (and central ownership) -- each of the local machines would know exactly what services it had provided and received, and if the balance was too negative, it would start rejecting some of the requests. Here's a simple example. Imagine I want to watch a movie that is accessible somewhere on the net. My machine would request sufficient network resources to show the movie. If my machine was a good netizen, no problem, but if it was a chronic debtor and other non-debtor machines were competing for the same resources, then many of the requests would be refused, and the result would be poor service. And I'd have the option to freely decide what to do. I could accept that level of service, or I could upgrade my machine to offer more network resources in exchange, or I could simply reduce my demands on the network. For example, perhaps I could bump up my local storage and store a local copy during periods when network usage was low. Another important part I didn't mention so far is the communication standards that would be required. But I know that a lot of this is already under development for the current Internet and cellular phone systems and other targets. But this is actually a place where the open process of development such as used in the Linux community could hasten progress. There's a lot of other wrinkles and complexities I've considered, and possibly even developed some partial solutions for... Way too much for a short public post. But if you're interested in discussing these things, I look forward to seeing your posts or email. And of course I'd be especially interested in news of related works in progress, and especially information about how I could contribute. .a/ssig Yes, I admit the spamnuts are ingenious in harvesting email addresses. Unfortunately, their stupidity is even greater than their ingenuity. And since they project their own stupidity onto others, they expect the others to send them money. Fat chance. ------------------------------ From: Terry Watkins Subject: I Need DOS Drivers For Dialogic D/21D Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 13:09:09 -0600 Organization: Posted via RemarQ Communities, Inc. I need the DOS drivers for Dialogic D/21D. If someone could email them to me or if they know where they might be on the net. Thank you very much, terry@av1611.org ------------------------------ From: Marc Goldstein Subject: Excellent Employment Opportunity Immediately Available Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 13:53:25 -0500 K & M TEL, INC. SEEKS: Experienced Sales Professional Wanted Immediately for Senior Sales Position! Industry sales experience is essential, Central Office and Transmission equipment sales experience desirable. Must be self-motivated/goal oriented and a leader among peers. College Degree Preferred. K & M TEL, INC. is a growing service-oriented organization that buys and sells all types of refurbished, new and used transmission, central office, switching, power and outside plant equipment to the Telecommunications Industry. In addition, K & M TEL, INC. provides quality installation, deinstallation, consulting, engineering, warehousing and project management. A partial client list includes Bell South, AT&T, GTE, MCI WorldCom and Lucent Technologies. Relocation to area necessary and program will be discussed upon interview. Attractive Compensation Package for the right individual. For Immediate Consideration Please Forward Resumes with cover letter to: Attn: MG K&M TEL, INC. 2015 Broad Street Brooksville, FL. 34609 800-801-5262 Fax: 352-754-5053 www.k-mtel.com or info@k-mtel.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 06:11:27 EST From: Joseph Norton Subject: Re: Watch Out! Sprint's Done it to the Consumer Again Hi Pat: On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did they even say anything at all about > fax and modem calls not being allowed when you first signed up for the > service or was it like 'Friday Free' where sort of mid-way through the > program they decided to change the rules and to hell with any contracts > they had outstanding? Yes, they do stipulate that the "unlimited" week-end service is only to be used for voice calls -- no data/fax calls. So, technically, they've got me dead to rights. At least they cut my service off rather than take the plan off my account without telling me anything. It would not have been pleasant to keep calling and then get the bill at the end of the month and find out my "unlimited" week-end plan had been taken off in the middle of the month and that I was stuck with the bill. My interest here is now more technical than anything else. Do they know about all of the around three data calls I made, the longest of which was a few months ago, with the others lasting only four or five minutes apiece? Again, I'd like them to prove to me which of the calls I made were data calls.(of course, they don't *HAVE* to prove anything.) Oh well ... Live and learn. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Watch Out! Sprint's Done it to the Consumer Again Organization: Excelsior Computer Services From: joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 21:02:36 GMT > repudiate whatever they wrote about later on, etc. If customer says > they will be bound legally by what they had put in writing, they say > no they won't; you can sue them or whatever. And even though Sprint But that's the problem --- and it's a problem with America: You >cannot< sue Sprint. The courts have repeatedly held (siding with Sprint) that they have no jurisdiction in matters involving phone companies! (People tried to sue Sprint after their "Free Friday" fiasco, but the courts wouldn't make a ruling.) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Generally when I am asked what to do about some dispute with Sprint, my suggestion is to withhold payment to the company until the dispute is resolved. In the case of a large company for example who deals with Sprint and then gets a phone bill which is totally out of line or different that the promises made by the company, you simply tell your accounts payable people to put a total freeze on all payments to Sprint until the problem gets resolved. Sprint has lately taken a liking to direct debit, meaning you give them your checking account number and authorize them to deduct the payment due each month. For convenience, this would be great if you were dealing with a company you could trust, but don't forget if you put a freeze on payments to Sprint pending adjustment of a dispute to also tell your bank **do not honor any further drafts from Sprint** because if you don't Sprint will ignore you and go right ahead getting money each month. Sprint has had a long history of screwing up almost every promotion they started. The customer service reps never get the story straight, they have different versions of it, etc ... long time readers here will recall the 'free modems' that Sprint sent out several years ago and the mixup on that. Free Fridays was another fiasco. If you go *way back* -- into the 1970's when they were first getting started as an entity independent of their original owner the Southern Pacific Railroad, they had screwups also, but those were understandable to a point; if your name was not AT&T then telecom was a whole new industry for the most part. Really, that's my best suggestion for anyone reading this: when Sprint stiffs you in a contract dispute or due to confusion over five different service reps giving you five different versions of some plan or another, then cease payments to them immediatly on any/all accounts you have with them. Wait until it goes to collection -- if it ever does -- and then tell the collection agency to let it go legal. If the collection agency offers to try and straighten it out, let them try. Coincidentally, there are two major nationwide collection agencies which won't accept business from Sprint any longer. A collection agency's first desire is to make money for itself through quick and easy commissions on collections. An agency makes no money if if has to recommend suit to its client, and the profit quickly evaporates when they have to continually go back to the client asking for the documentation requested, etc. One agency stated that Sprint's paper was about the worst they had ever seen in terms of no documentation available, chronic customer disputes (as opposed to simple inability or unwillingness to pay). That's about all that works with Sprint. PAT] ------------------------------ From: James Wyatt Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1999 15:24:23 -0600 Organization: Fastlane Communications (using Airnews.net!) FWIW, until they added another cell in my area, I was having my dual-mode Sprint PCS phone jump into analog (therefore roam) in my house! As roaming isn't free and I'm on 24hr call, we got some $3.00 support calls for subminute calls. I mean " Let me call you right back. click." The best thing is the caller-id so you can run to a desk phone. If it weren't company policy to use these things, I would have jumped to AT&T digital long ago. As it is, the new cell has *really* improved things and I'm a lot happier. Maybe they haven't practiced their cell-smanship in your area yet. On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Jon Solomon wrote: > My Sprint PCS phone won't work inside my house, but my BAM service > (digital) works fine. I guess that's because SPRINT PCS uses a larger > frequency (I heard it is in the Gigihertz), while Bell Atlantic Mobile > digital service uses 900 mhz. [ ... ] > They say that when they start selling analog/digital phones the problem > will go away, but I don't consider use of AMPS circuits to replace > digital service adequate ... ------------------------------ From: jyoull@hotmail.com (Jim Youll) Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... Date: 28 Mar 1999 02:43:05 GMT Jon Solomon wrote: > My Sprint PCS phone won't work inside my house, but my BAM service > (digital) works fine. I guess that's because SPRINT PCS uses a larger > frequency (I heard it is in the Gigihertz), while Bell Atlantic Mobile > digital service uses 900 mhz. > I ordered two separate Sprint PCS phones which I cannot use any more. > I guess that's why Sprint PCS doesn't require contracts. I had > to disconnect both of them ... > They say that when they start selling analog/digital phones the problem > will go away, but I don't consider use of AMPS circuits to replace > digital service adequate ... Beware SprintPCS anyway ... they had a good price in this area (apparently everywhere else too too) but I made the mistake of asking how I could be sure the rate wouldn't arbitrarily increase after the first month or two since their paperwork makes no reference to the duration of the rate plan (no contract - which should be a BENEFIT not a problem.) Answers to six calls today to the local office and national sales number: 1. "The rate will continue until you decide to change to some other rate plan." Will you write that down and fax it to me? "I don't have it written on any brochures". Can't you write it on a piece of letterhead and fax it? "sure". (nothing ever came) 2. "The guarantee is on the 'fine print' on the back of the brochure" Great. Can you circle it and fax it to me since I can't find it on the fine print on MY brochure? "Sure, in a couple of hours". How about in 10 minutes. "Okay. But I'm busy." -- fax arrives, nothing is circled, fine print is the same as on my copy. 3. I call back "Sir, are you an attorney? You sound like an attorney". What assurance do I have that the rate won't change? "Because I just told you it won't". Great. Can you just write down what you just said and fax it to me? "No" Why not? "I'm not an attorney. I'll have to have someone call you Monday" 4. "We don't guarantee YOU anything. You don't guarantee US anything. We can drop you at any time and you can drop us." 5. "You can keep your rate indefinitely. You've got my word on it". Can you write that down and fax it to me? "No. You have to take my word on it." 6. "The promotion runs to the end of June 2000 but you can keep your rate as long as you want." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does the above sound familiar to the folks who have signed up with any sort of Sprint service? Try calling back a seventh time, getting the person's name, and ask their permiss- ion to tape the call. Make sure the part about getting their permission is on the recording itself or they will later say they never gave you permission. PAT] ------------------------------ From: CHRISTOPHER W. (Chris) BOONE Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 06:52:57 -0600 Organization: Jacor-Dallas Engineering Dept. (www.jacor.com) Sprint uses 2 GHz CDMA technology ... BAM is likely 800MHz TDMA on its digital side. Personally I will stay with CDMA systems though 800 MHz would be the better freq to use them on vs 2 GHz ... but Sprint and the other wideband PCS ops have no choice ... the older 800MHz freqs are full ... and BAM MUST drop analog channels to put digital service in ... so there's a problem that could crop up later on. Your house is probably not in a good spot for the Sprint sites ... or could be in a crossover area ... had the same problem here in Dallas ... they added extra sites and the problem went away! Chris Chief Engineer, JACOR-Dallas ------------------------------ From: alniven@earthlink.net (Al Niven) Subject: VFX 40 ESC Plus 4 Sale Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 16:08:22 GMT Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. Reply-To: alniven@earthlink.net Best Offer ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #42 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Tue Mar 30 12:08:22 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA15690; Tue, 30 Mar 1999 12:08:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 12:08:22 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199903301708.MAA15690@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #43 TELECOM Digest Tue, 30 Mar 99 12:08:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 43 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Update (Canada) EXTRA, March 24, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) Re: Phone Companies Harassing Each Other (Carl Zwanzig) North American Broadband Market Analysis Data? (Hans Raffelt) V+H to Mileage? (William Petrisko) T1 Format, TR-08 (Dennis Taylor) Privacy on the Internet? Don't Count on it (Monty Solomon) Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... (Jason Lindquist) Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... (Ryan Tucker) Sprint vs Sprint Canada (Joey Lindstrom) Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God (Carl Moore) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 10:35:58 -0500 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) EXTRA, March 24, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 175b: March 24, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ TELECOM UPDATE -- EXTRA!!! AMERITECH BUYS 20% OF BELL CANADA U.S. telecom giant Ameritech Corporation is buying 20% of Bell Canada, for $5.1 Billion. The deal is expected to close by the end of May. As part of the deal, Bell Canada will acquire BCE's share of BCE Mobile, Teleglobe, and six regional phone companies. The deal will involve strategic co-operation projects, including the exchange of about 15 key professionals, co-operation in sales and marketing, and the exchange of operational know-how and strategic skills. Ameritech will name two directors to the Bell Canada board, one to the BCE Mobile board, and appoint Bell's Chief Financial Officer. Bell's investments in BCE Emergis, CGI Group, and Telesat Canada, are being transferred to BCE. Watch for a full report in the April issue of Telemanagement, available by subscription at http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 09:18:28 PST From: Carl Zwanzig Subject: Re: Phone Companies Harassing Each Other For some highly entertaining reading: Dialing for DSL A behind-the-scenes look at the lack of competition in the phone market by Lewis Perdue [...] That the local markets are still not open to robust competition is really not in doubt. What company handles your local calls? Can you name any competitors? Have your local rates changed much? If you answered "Pacific Bell," "no," and "I don't think so," you're in the majority. And that Baby Bells throughout the country have successfully stymied a key component of the Telecommunications Act. As further evidence, the regulatory agencies and the courts have repeatedly enied the Baby Bells'requests to enter the long-distance market. Why? On the grounds that the Bells have not opened up their local markets. Time after time, judges and regulators have agreed with competitor's lawsuits and briefs charging the Bells with deliberately thwarting competition. [...] Marge Donaldson, co-location manager of Covad, said in regulatory filings that Pac Bell has denied "well over a third" of their requests for co-location. According to Covad's FCC filing, after they demanded a re-survey of Pac Bell's s central offices and filed an antitrust lawsuit against them, Surprise, surprise, [Pac Bell] magically found space in all of the San Francisco Bay Area offices that Covad brought to the court's attention." It's worth noting, according to the documents, that many of those central offices were locations from which Pac Bell had planned to offer its own DSL service. [...] (C) 1998, TechWeek and Metro States Media, Inc. z! Carl Zwanzig - Network manager & Systems janitor InterTrust Technologies Corp cpz"@"intertrust.com 408.222.6125 "What about my pickle?!?!?" - R Rococo ------------------------------ From: Hans Raffelt Subject: North American Broadband Market Analysis Data? Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 10:36:39 GMT Organization: @Home Network Canada Hi there, Can anyone recommend sources of North American broadband market analysis data sites either for free or for charge on the Internet? Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Hans ------------------------------ From: bill@primenet.com (William Petrisko) Subject: V+H to Mileage? Date: 29 Mar 1999 17:25:36 GMT Organization: Frontier GlobalCenter Inc. What exactly are the V and H coordinates in the LERG? ie: Can I determine mileage between CO's given just the V+H coordinates? If so, how? Thanks, ---William J. Petrisko (WP5)----------------------bill@primenet.net--- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 18:00:24 -0600 From: royal.star@prodigy.net (Dennis Taylor) Reply-To: royal.star@prodigy.net Subject: T1 Format, TR-08 Could someone give a brief description of the T1 framing, TR-08? (I know the signaling bits are different) I know this has been used for many years between CO's and SLC-96's. However, now it seems that CLEC's are using it direct to a customer's premise. I recently had the unplesant experience of attempting to interface a T1 using TR-08 framing to a very well known manufacturers channel bank. (This well known manufacturer says TR-08 is old and they do not plan on supporting it.) All the CLEC could/would tell me is that this T1 is exactly like a T1 connected to a SLC 96. They claimed the T1 was D4 framing, we then had the T1 changed to ESF, still no go. I have since found only two companies that support TR-08 framing. This T1 is coming off a new Lucent 5E switch. This CLEC is employing many retired switch techs; is this all they know or is there another reason they are pushing TR-08? Dennis Taylor ------------------------------ Subject: Privacy on the Internet? Don't Count on it Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 09:18:03 -0500 From: Monty Solomon By Amitai Etzioni, 03/29/99 Most Americans are troubled by their loss of privacy on the Internet and are groping for new safeguards. In response, business associations are offering to regulate themselves. The associations encourage members to arrange their Web sites so that a visitor can readily ascertain what privacy policy a particular corporation employes. Individuals are then said to be free to avoid those Web sites that unduly keep tabs on them. -------------------------- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I now have a little script written for DOS which works just fine to maintain my privacy. I call this small script 'wipe.bat' and it reads like this: CLS echo off echo IMMMMMMMMMMMMM; echo : *** IE3 *** : echo HMMMMMMMMMMMMM< rem ** Delete Internet Explorer 3 cookies cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y C:\windows\cookies\*.txt deltree /y C:\windows\cookies\index.dat rem ** Delete Internet Explorer 3 Cache cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y c:\windows\Tempor~1\*.* rem ** Delete Internet Explorer 3 History cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y c:\windows\history\*.* echo off echo IMMMMMMMMMMMMM; echo : *** IE4 *** : echo HMMMMMMMMMMMMM< rem ** Delete Internet Explorer 4 cookies and cache cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y C:\windows\profiles\ptownson\cookies\*.* deltree /y C:\windows\profiles\ptownson\Tempor~1\*.* deltree /y C:\windows\profiles\ptownson\history\mshist*.* deltree /y C:\windows\profiles\ptownson\history\index.dat echo off echo IMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM; echo : *** Netscape 3 *** : echo HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM< rem ** Delete Netscape 3 Cookies cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y C:\progra~1\netscape\naviga~1\cookies.txt rem ** Delete Netscape 3 Cache cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y C:\progra~1\netscape\naviga~1\cache\*.* rem ** Delete Netscape 3 History cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y C:\progra~1\netscape\naviga~1\netscape.hst echo off echo IMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM; echo : *** Netscape Communicator *** : echo HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM< rem ** Delete Netscape 4 Cookies cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y C:\progra~1\netscape\users\ptownson\cookies.txt rem ** Delete Netscape 4 Cache cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y C:\progra~1\netscape\users\ptownson\Cache\*.* rem ** Delete Netscape 4 History cd\ PROMPT $p$g PATH C:\windows\command;C:\windows;C:\windows\co deltree /y C:\progra~1\netscape\users\ptownson\netscape.hst ------------------------------ Just take any one or more of the above combinations which apply in your case -- or take them all, it won't hurt if some do not apply in your situation -- and place them in \windows\command on your machine. So that you don't forget to wipe after you finish your daily or more often visit to the web, have this happen each time your computer is turned on by entering a line in your autoexec.bat file saying 'CALL WIPE'. This will have the effect of causing Windows a lot longer to start up, but it is a way of not forgetting to wipe when you get finished. If you prefer, put a shortcut to it in your Quick Launch or your system tray and from time to time, click on it. Or put a reference to it in System Agent and let Windows itself cause its own amnesia from time to time. What the above does is zaps *all* cookies, *all* 'temporary internet files', *all* of your URL history from the secluded, sort of obscure hiding places on your hard drive where Windows stores it for later inspection by itself, or sites you visit, or god forbid, uninvited people who come knocking at (or knocking down!) your front door. It kills cookies dead on contact. The most practical result is that none of the sites you visit has any idea who you are or where you have been before, etc. The above does *not* delete your 'favorites' or bookmark files. It does however get rid of those 'desirable' cookies you may want to keep such as passwords and user names at sites where you login on a regular basis, perhaps like Yahoo, but you can probably live with having to type in the information each time. If you do not want to erase a few selected cookies, then modify the above script to move those few cookies out of the way temporarily, zap the rest, then put back the desired cookies in their place. To add an extra layer of good cyber-hygiene, be sure to run defrag once a week or so, immediatly after you wipe and before you start your web surfing again. Improvements and modifications to the above script will be appreciated. I don't personally like making that area 'read only' as some have suggested; occassionally there will be some image you want to capture, and if nothing else, you can always go to Temporary Internet Files before you wipe, find the thing you want and drag if off to somewhere else. Making that territory 'read only' means you may not be able to retrieve later what you wanted but forgot to save on the spot. If everyone remembered to wipe when they finished using the web it would not leave much for the sites like doubleclick and their ilk to work with would it ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: jlindqui@see.figure1.net (Jason Lindquist) Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... Date: 30 Mar 1999 02:54:55 GMT Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign CHRISTOPHER W. (Chris) BOONE writes: > Sprint uses 2 GHz CDMA technology ... BAM is likely 800MHz > TDMA on its digital side. *looks at BAM-branded QCP-820 hanging from his belt* Nope, Bell Atlantic No-We-Swear-to-Kosh-We're-not-NYNEX Mobile is a CDMA outfit. JL, Whose opinions Qualcomm can't afford Jason Lindquist <*> "Mostly though, I think it gave us hope, linky [at] see.figure1.net That there can always be a new beginning. KB9LCL Even for people like us." -- Gen. Susan Ivanova, B5, "Sleeping In Light" ------------------------------ From: rtucker+from+199903@katan.ttgcitn.com (Ryan Tucker) Subject: Re: Sprint PCS Loses Too ... Date: 30 Mar 1999 05:02:44 GMT Organization: TTGCITN Communications, Des Moines IA and Rochester NY Reply-To: rtucker+replyto+199903@katan.ttgcitn.com In , Jon Solomon spewed: > My Sprint PCS phone won't work inside my house, but my BAM service > (digital) works fine. I guess that's because SPRINT PCS uses a larger > frequency (I heard it is in the Gigihertz), while Bell Atlantic Mobile > digital service uses 900 mhz. Nope ... it's a matter of Sprint PCS not having a cell close enough to make it through your house's walls. Sure, 1900MHz (aka PCS) networks need to be much more dense to provide the same interior coverage as 800MHz (aka cellular) for various reasons, but that doesn't mean that a well-built PCS network can't knock the socks off of a cellular network :-) Sprint PCS seems to have a tendency to spread their resources too thin ... the problem with building a nationwide all-digital network from the ground up is that having *something* in every market is more important than having *quality* in every market. My advice? Give other carriers in your area a try ... you may just find something which works in your particular situation. Then again, you may not. ;-) Ryan Tucker http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/ GSM/VM/Fax: +15157712865 Box 57083, Pleasant Hill IA 50317-0002 President, TTGCITN Communications Box 92425, Rochester NY 14692-0425 Please keep public threads public -- e-mail responses will be ignored. ------------------------------ From: Joey Lindstrom Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 21:40:33 -0700 Reply-To: Joey Lindstrom Subject: Sprint vs Sprint Canada On Mon, 29 Mar 1999 21:31:13 -0500 (EST), editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > Sprint has had a long history of screwing up almost every promotion > they started. The customer service reps never get the story straight, > they have different versions of it, etc ... long time readers here > will recall the 'free modems' that Sprint sent out several years ago > and the mixup on that. Free Fridays was another fiasco. If you go > *way back* -- into the 1970's when they were first getting started as > an entity independent of their original owner the Southern Pacific > Railroad, they had screwups also, but those were understandable to a > point; if your name was not AT&T then telecom was a whole new industry > for the most part. I know that you're referring to Sprint's US operations, and indeed you're far from the only person to say anything negative about them. But as each TELECOM Digest lands in my email inbox, and more negative Sprint comments arrive with them, I find myself slightly concerned that Sprint Canada, a completely separate entity, is getting tarred with the same brush. I think most of the people who read these postings are savvy enough to know the difference, but I'd just like to point out for the record, to anyone in Canada who's ever considered switching to Sprint Canada, that none of these problems apply. (Before I continue, I'll also state for the record that I am not a Sprint Canada employee -- I'm merely a very satisfied customer with nothing to gain) I've been a Sprint Canada long distance customer for about two years. Their service has been outstanding. Their rates are competitive, and, best of all, they have just a few basic rate plans and each is extremely easy to understand. Some long distance companies, such as AT&T Canada, promise that you'll save a certain percentage off "regular" long distance rates or the rates charged by the ILEC - but they never state what those rates are (and indeed, "regular" ILEC rates vary dramatically depending on where you're calling, time of day, etc.) Sprint Canada does have one plan that offers "50% off the three numbers you call the most" but this is based on THEIR (published) rates. In short, before you place a long distance call with Sprint Canada as your default carrier, you KNOW what your call is going to cost (per minute that is) -- there's no guessing. Indeed, during one month, I kept a stop-watch by my phone and timed every call I made, then entered each call in a logbook. When the bill arrived, I compared the final total with the total I had already calculated -- it matched perfectly. Dealing with customer service is, believe it or not, always a pleasure. And when I say this, please believe me when I say I'm a jaded old fart who's always prepared to have to fight with the person on the other end of the phone in order to get what he wants. With Sprint Canada, it's never a fight. Indeed, on one occasion, I phoned them to dispute a charge for a 5-minute call that neither I nor my room-mate had placed. There was no argument: the fella on the phone asked me which call it was; I told him, and he said "ok sir, that call has been removed from your bill -- is there anything else I can help you with?" About a month after that, we finally tracked down the source of the call -- a "friend" had visited and not bothered to ask permission to make a long distance call. Sheepishly, I called Sprint Canada back, told them the story, and offered to pay for the call. "Don't worry about it" was their response. In February, I signed up with them for their new local service -- I live in Calgary, the first place in Canada that they offered this service. This changeover didn't go smoothly -- in fact, it was a comedy of errors that I previously reported to this forum. The blame can be summed up as follows: 20% due to Sprint Canada's employee's inexperience (this was something completely new to them -- see Pat's earlier comments about Sprint in the 70's), and 80% due to Telus' foot-dragging and taking advantage of this inexperience, as well as their (Telus') outright lies (they told Sprint, midway through the changeover, that I had told a Telus technician that I was unhappy with the progress of the changeover and that I wanted to go back to Telus!) Throughout, they did the best they could and before I even had the chance to ask, they assured me that I was going to get one free month's service to make up for the three days I went through without any dial tone. When the first bill arrived, there was a credit for TWO free months. For a short while, I was also using their internet service. It's a little pricier than many of your local low-cost ISP's, but you have the advantage that you can take your laptop on the road and dial-in to access your account from any of (last I heard) 17 centres in Canada at no extra charge - if you're outside those areas, there's a toll-free line that's charged at regular Sprint Canada LD rates. In my line of work, I talk to a lot of people -- some telecom professionals, but mostly "average people". I have yet, since Sprint Canada began offering long distance service, to hear ANYBODY say ANYTHING negative about Sprint Canada. Comments have ranged from ambivalent (non-Sprint customers or people who really don't care much about such things) to extremely positive -- not one nasty comment in the bunch. Sprint Canada is owned by Call-Net, which in turn is PARTIALLY (I think 25%) owned by Sprint. In reality, this is a completely different company run by different people with, apparently, a whole different approach to customer service and what it takes to win, and especially keep, their customers. They give me excellent service at very competitive rates. I heartily recommend them to anyone. Please don't assume that because Sprint in the USA are a bunch of bastards, that Sprint Canada is the same. It ain't. :-) From the messy desktop of Joey Lindstrom Email: Joey@GaryNumanFan.NU or joey@lindstrom.com Phone: +1 403 313-JOEY FAX: +1 413 643-0354 (yes, 413 not 403) Visit The NuServer! http://www.GaryNumanFan.NU Visit The Webb! http://webb.GaryNumanFan.NU "Don't stay to watch a great old ship go down." --Everything I Need To Know I Learned From Babylon 5 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 14:06:36 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God The moderator writes: > Patrons are asked to check those devices with an attendant in the > coat room on entry, **or have them completely turned off** while in > the music area. What if anything is said about vibrator mode for a pager? I have a pager and for reasons just like this, I commonly have it in vibrator mode. Out of common courtesy, if one gets a silent page at a concert or other event, don't disturb the other people there! (If I am in the audience, examining a silent page shouldn't cause any problems, except that I SHOULD NOT USE ANY LIGHT other than the one built into the pager which I have.) In this situation (also see the following paragraph), I would appreciate a "silent-mode-only" reminder to avoid an honest forgetting to set it in that mode. In previous years, I have been in the gallery for a round of the McDonald's LPGA golf tournament in Wilmington, Delaware, and have seen, among other things, "no cellular phones", but nothing about pagers?! Self-imposed rule here is to disable pager beeps (i.e. vibrator mode only). (Although traffic to my pager is low to begin with.) We've been through discussion about such devices on airplanes, regarding possible interference with the aircraft communication system. Even with such devices turned off, do the wireless signals (for *incoming* pages and cellular calls) still make it into the aircraft? A turned-on cellu- lar phone can make outgoing calls and I can understand concern about unfamiliar devices causing said interference, but if *incoming* signals make it into the aircraft, is any interference caused by connection to said devices? (I'm thinking it might be seen as harder to enforce "incoming allowed but no outgoing", and the atmosphere for such an inquiry might be poisoned by recent incidents like those people trapped in airplanes on the tarmac for several hours in Detroit?) You do see phones being available on some aircraft, and presumably they have been cleared of any interference (does the airline make money on such calls?). (I remembered seeing something -- not in the Digest? -- long ago about the President of the U.S. being able to respond, from 30,000 feet up, to a breaking development. And we just heard of the plane carrying the Russian premier turning around in flight.) A pager, on an airplane or anywhere else, cannot send outgoing signals. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not know if the Chicago Symphony Orchestra has ever addressed the question of 'vibrator mode' on pagers. I am sure they would be reasonable about it. Their main problem for a long time was cell phones which rang and pagers which beeped throughout concerts. They rightfully put a stop to that with their insistence to either turn the device off or leave it behind. Some pagers also have a 'hold mode' which is where it will receive a message but not beep until the person specifically asks for it. This would be seen at Symphony each week by the number of people in the lobby during intermission who would reach in their pocket, pull out their pager and tap a button on it; suddenly there would be dozens of them beeping at once, with messages they had collected during the first part of the performance. Getting back to the subject title of this message about 'House of God' I notice that Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, CA now reminds the people at their religious services each week that 'pagers and cell phones should be turned off or substantially muted during the time services are in progress ...' It seems a shame when we cannot get away from the rest of the world for a short time each week, whether it is for good music, meditation or whatever, and that we must stay in touch, no matter what. Are any of us *that important* to the rest of the world? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #43 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 1 19:34:03 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA24143; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 19:34:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 19:34:03 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199904020034.TAA24143@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #44 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Apr 99 19:13:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 44 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Online Account - Name/Address Error (David Winston Fiedler) Media Takes Credit in Battling 'Melissa' Virus (Monty Solomon) Melissa and Papa viruses (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "Internetworking Technologies Handbook", Downes (Rob Slade) Unused Time on the Advertiser-Sponsored Phone Network (Mike Pollock) Re: Anyone Want a Privately Owned Internet? (John Nagle) Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, OH (G. Hall) Last Laugh! Make "Meli$$a" Fast! (Rob Slade) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson. You can reach me at: Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 (SFCA number) Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 14:33:25 -0600 From: David Winston Fiedler Subject: AT&T Online Account - Name/Address Error Hi Pat: I figured you and the readers of the Telecom Digest would enjoy hearing about technical problems AT&T is having with my on-line account information. In March I moved, got a new phone number and selected AT&T as a long-distance carrier. I opted to be an 'on-line' customer, meaning I get no bills in the mail. The account number is logically one's telephone number, but the password requires *both* numbers and letters, an arrangement I find particularly onerous as I could think of nothing easy to remember that had both. When email arrived saying my first statement was posted on the internet, I went and could not remember my password. The security word was no help either, so I called customer service who provided me access through a new password once my identity was confirmed. When I spoke to the AT&T rep, she had all my current information -- I had to verify name, address and mother's maiden name to "prove" who I was. However, when I then viewed "my" information on-line, the name and address was not me! Rather, someone else, who apparently had that number previously, was shown although reverse look-up did not confirm that belief. More disconcerting was that there was an outstanding balance, apparently from the national access charge and taxes which had accumulated unpaid each month on the "open" account, even though no long distance calls were made. A call back to AT&T confirmed that my information on the account was correct and present in two locations in AT&T data banks, but the third place, the on-line display, still showed information from the old past-due account. The AT&T rep I spoke with then apologized, said a credit would be made to "my" account for the past due amount, but did not provide the extra $5.00 I requested for my trouble in calling to point out their error. Interestingly, she said also that the incorrect name/address on my first online bill would remain unchanged. Apparently once it gets posted, it's permanent. I wonder how long this might have gone on; in a case like this, the poor fellow who was being billed for an account he closed might really have been surprised one day. Kind regards, David Winston Fiedler St. Louis, Missouri USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 12:01:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Media Takes Credit in Battling 'Melissa' Virus Media Grok - March 30, 1999 Media Takes Credit in Battling 'Melissa' Virus Finally, a virus lives up to the advance hype. Almost. After a weekend of warnings about the e-mail attachment from hell dubbed "Melissa," the virus wreaked havoc on some large corporations' e-mail servers Monday, but damage wasn't as widespread as expected. Many in the computing public have grown accustomed to dire warnings followed by hoaxes or de-fanged viruses. In this case, the sneaky virus - which looks like it's coming from a friend - hit e-mail systems at Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Lucent and even the U.S. Dept. of Defense, according to the Washington Post. But was all the publicity, well, another round of hype? Mary Jander of TechWeb (via Data Communications) said that the major ISPs around the country experienced no problems. Her piece countered the dire reports on TV and in major newspapers of "hundreds of thousands" of computers affected by Melissa. A prominent network operators' user group said that news reports may have caused companies to shut off their mail servers for no good reason. The Wall Street Journal took a similar tack, with Lee Gomes and Dean Takahashi reporting that the virus "spread considerable alarm," without evidence of too much mayhem. The WSJ's experts said that while it appeared to cause no great damage, they're taking it as a warning sign that the "bad guys have upped the ante." Indeed, tech reporters thrust into virus warfare played active roles and may have helped the situation by sounding the alarm, for better or worse. A member of the Dept. of Defense's Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) told the San Jose Mercury News that the damage Monday was "not as bad as it could have been. It received quite a bit of media attention this weekend and people took precautions and made preparations." The Merc's Miguel Helft also reported on the "Papa" mutation of Melissa that spreads through Excel and forwards itself to 60 people. He said hackers are trying to top each other using Melissa code available on the Net - while antivirus companies are countering with new patches and fixes. Also doing admirable enterprise work is the New York Times' hacker hound, John Markoff, who said Phar Lap Software's Richard Smith was "a lone software detective" who had already assembled a dossier on the possible culprit. It turns out Smith had earlier raised concerns about Microsoft using unique identifying numbers in Office programs. Now he used the ID numbers to trace the Melissa code to a hacker known as VicodinES. "It's pretty clear that VicodinES is somehow related to all this," Smith told Markoff. "Whether he's the author I don't know, but he has his fingerprints everywhere." With some digging, Markoff found that VicodinES is likely a high-school-age hacker with a reputation as a talented virus writer. One expert said it was hard to tell the total damage yet because of the "fog of battle." As part of ZDNet's whopping Melissa special report, Luke Reiter and Jim Louderback reported that the systems administrator hosting VicodinES' pages says the hacker has gone into retirement and wasn't responsible for the virus, but added that VicodinES was "talented enough" to have created Melissa. Washington Post's John Schwartz tried to gauge the early damage, saying Lockheed Martin cut its 100,000-person e-mail system off from the outside world. He said that one advertising company reported being hit with 32,000 e-mails in 45 minutes, shutting down its legitimate e-mail users. Computer security expert Eugene Spafford surprisingly blamed Microsoft's market dominance for part of the trouble: "We have created this incredibly homogeneous environment in which many, many computers run the same programs, creating a large population with no immunity," Spafford said, "like the Spaniards bringing smallpox to the Incas." Gee, Your Virus Smells Like E-mail http://www.thestandard.com/articles/display/0,1449,4020,00.html?home.bf 'Melissa' Computer Virus Offers a Glimpse at the Perils to Come http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB92273819559774003.htm Mutant E-mail Viruses Battled http://www.mercurycenter.com/business/top/015281.htm Digital Tracks Yield Clues to Creator of Internet Virus http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/03/biztech/articles/30virus.html Reports of Melissa Mayhem Exaggerated? http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19990329S0030 Melissa Trail Leads to 'Ex' Virus Writer http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2234018,00.html New Virus Snarls E-mail Systems http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/march99/virus30.htm 'Melissa' Continues to Wreak Havoc http://www.msnbc.com/news/253803.asp ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 10:22:20 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Melissa and Papa Viruses Deadly 'Melissa' copycat virus can bring down networks By Ann Harrison A new copycat virus, which is similar to the widespread "Melissa" virus, has the potential to bring down entire networks instead of simply jamming e-mail servers, an antivirus software vendor said during a press conference today. http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/CWFlash/9903291copy 'Melissa' mutates By Kathleen Ohlson and Ann Harrison As corporate customers scramble to protect themselves from the "Melissa" virus, it has begun to mutate and defeat a widely used patch, one industry watcher said. http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/CWFlash/9903291melissa2 ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 08:37:13 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Internetworking Technologies Handbook", Kevin Downes Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKINTCHB.RVW 990220 "Internetworking Technologies Handbook", Kevin Downes et al, 1998, 1-57870-102-3, U$50.00/C$71.95 %A Kevin Downes %A Merilee Ford %A H. Kim Lew %A Steve Spanier %A Time Stevenson %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 1998 %G 1-57870-102-3 %I Macmillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$50.00/C$71.95 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 info@mcp.com %P 856 p. %T "Internetworking Technologies Handbook, Second Edition" The preface says that the book supports administrators installing Cisco networking products. But it also says that the content is for anyone seeking to understand internetworking. This somewhat schizophrenic direction is readily apparent in part one, whose six chapters purport to be an introduction to internetworking. On the one hand, the text seems to take the most simplistic possible route linking what appear to be already prepared sets of figures. On occasion, however, we are presented with a flurry or poorly explained thickets of standards numbers and TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms). Ultimately, very little is properly illuminated for the reader. Part two looks at some LAN standards, presenting quick outtakes from partial Ethernet, FDDI (Fiber Distributed Data Interface), and token ring specs. Frame relay, High-Speed Serial Interface, ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network), PPP (Point to Point Protocol), SMDS (Switched Multimegabit Data Service), xDSL (various forms of Digital Subscriber Line), SDLC (Synchronous Data Link Control), X.25, multiservice technologies, and Virtual Private Networks (VPN) are summed up in almost less space than it takes to list them in part three. Switching, in part four, is quite variable: ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode) and data-link switching get a level of detail completely unsupported by the previous material while LAN switching is dismissed in five pages. Part five looks at various, mostly vendor supplied, networking protocols, including Appletalk, DECnet, SNA (Systems Network Architecture), TCP/IP, NetWare, OSI (Open System Interconnection), Vines, and XNS (Xerox Network Systems). (The review of TPC/IP actually isn't half bad.) Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (IGRP), SNA routing, IP multicast, NetWare Link Services Protocol (NLSP), OSI routing, Open Shortest Path First (OSPF), Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP), Routing Information Protocol (RIP), and a discussion of quality of service make up the look at routing in part six. Part seven, on the other hand, is a very good introduction to Internet access issues for the non-professional, with reasonable reviews of security, directory services, and, to a lesser extent, caching. Network management returns to the earlier inconsistent approach in its treatment of IBM network management, RMON (Remote Monitoring), and SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol) in part eight. Some vendor sponsored books manage to rise above their origins. This is not one that does. While the text is mercifully free of marketing and promotion, the material is suitable for neither the newcomer looking for concepts and insight or the professional looking for hard data. The title really cannot be said to be justified on any level. I can't recommend it for those not installing Cisco products, and I really doubt that it could be honestly recommended to Cisco customers, either. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKINTCHB.RVW 990220 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Q. What is the difference between a computer salesman and a used car salesman? A. A car salesman knows how to drive, and knows when he's lying. http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: Unused Time on the Freeway Network Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 12:30:55 -0500 Here's some more FreeWay info. Note that you have to get pretty good at predicting the duration of your calls. If you listen to 10 minutes worth of ads but only use 2 minutes of that on a call, the remaining 8 minutes go bye-bye. Pat, if you just signed up for FreeWay, be prepared to wait a bit. I signed up back in January, and they were apparently pretty backlogged. I just got my PIN last week! An FAQ from Freeway goes like this: Thank you for your email. Here is a list of answers to your question(s), and others that FreeWay members most commonly ask. Please let us know if you have any additional questions or comments, and thank you for your support! BroadPoint Member Services 1. How long does it take to receive a PIN? BroadPoint is committed to providing the benefits of the FreeWay service to as many people as possible, and as quickly as possible. However, as with any successful new product or service, consumer demand may cause a delay between the time that you submit an application, and the time that you are activated for and able to use the service. Although we are unable to give you a specific time that it takes for you to receive your PIN, please be assured that we will do everything within our power to activate you as soon as possible. 2. What are the rates/charges after I have used my free minutes? With FreeWay, you never pay a bill for the free calls that you earn. Approximately 30 seconds before the free time you have earned on FreeWay has elapsed, you will hear a tone alerting you that the talk time is ending, allowing you to wrap up the conversation. When the 30 seconds has expired, your call will be ended. If you want to continue the call by using FreeWay, simply dial the toll free number again and listen to another set of messages. (A quick tip: Many people make sure that they listen to more than enough messages at the beginning of their call so that they won't run short of time). Alternatively, you can call them back on your existing phone service. Please note that in that case, you will be billed by your phone company at your existing rate for that second call. Since most people use FreeWay for only a portion of their long distance calls, you will still receive a bill from your existing long distance carrier for any calls you make using that service. In summary, as long as you are dialing the FreeWay toll free number, entering your PIN, and listening to messages, you will never receive a bill for that call. 3. Is there a way that I can save minutes and use them for a later call? At this time, any minutes that you earn are used in the call, even if you end the call before you use up all of your earned minutes. In the future, you may have the ability to save minutes for use on a later call. 4. Will I be able to use Freeway to make international calls? At this present time Freeway can only be used within the United States. However, soon we will extend FreeWay to include free international, wireless (cellular and PCS) and even video-telephone calling. Stay tuned! 5. Do I have to change long distance carriers now that I have signed up for Freeway? No, there is no need to change long distance carriers now that you have signed up for FreeWay. Most people use FreeWay to supplement their existing long distance service, using it for a portion of their long distance calls. Whenever you want to use FreeWay, simply dial the toll free number (1-877-FREEWAY) from any phone (at home or on the road) and follow the simple prompts. 6. Should everyone in the household have their own Personal Identification Number? Yes, everyone in the household must have their own PIN. The information that you give in your profile will be used to select advertisements that reflect your hobbies and interests. In this way, the advertisements you hear will be very interesting and potentially valuable to you. In addition, to ensure the continued success of FreeWay, we need to be sure that advertisers can be sure that they are delivering messages to the proper subscribers. 7. Can I use FreeWay when traveling or do I have to use my home phone? FreeWay is ideal for the traveler. You can use Freeway from any phone in the United States, including pay phones. Just dial the toll free access number (1-877-FREEWAY) and follow the simple prompts. It's that easy!! 8. Does Freeway share my personal information with other companies? No company other than BroadPoint will gain access to your profile information without your consent. The information will be used exclusively to deliver messages that are as relevant and interesting as possible for you. BroadPoint takes our relationship with our members very seriously, and will not violate your trust. Mike ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: Re: Anyone Want a Privately Owned Internet? Organization: ICGNetcom Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 05:49:08 GMT shanen@my-dejanews.com writes: > The way I imagine it, I'd own my own computer with its own small > multi-frequency transceiver. When I wanted to access a resource > somewhere else on the net, my computer would contact neighboring > computers and ask them to help set up a virtual circuit to the > resource, and once the circuit was set up, the computers on that > circuit would simply relay the data to my machine. I had that idea about a decade ago. It's not a bad one, but it turns out that radio networks don't work well unless at least one end of the link has a decent antenna location. Unless you can get people to put antennae on their roofs, it won't work. Metricom's Ricochet system comes close to this technically, with their little units on street lights. Those relay by radio from customer to wireless node to wireless node until they reach a wired access point and connect into a leased line to an Internet node. A guy named Dewayne Hendricks tried to do this as a nonprofit, using libraries as the nodes, but it didn't get very far. John Nagle ------------------------------ From: gmhall@apk.net (Gail M. Hall) Subject: Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, Ohio Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 05:24:56 GMT Organization: APK Net This law was passed last week, but I haven't seen any comment about it in the TELECOM Digest. Interesting! We are told here that Brooklyn is the first city in the US to pass such a law. Many people hope it will not be the last. I think the law says that if they do use a cell phone in a moving vehicle, they must have both hands on the steering wheel. I'll state right up front that I have never used a cell phone and don't know much about them. I sat next to a driver recently who does have a cell phone, and as we were driving near one town, I noticed her pick up her cell phone with her right hand and dial it with her thumb. She did have to look down at the buttons to make sure she hit the right buttons. That does make an old fogy passenger a little nervous! She did at least keep her left hand on the steering wheel. She said that she was calling her girlfriend because she had promised to call when we drove through that town just to let her friend know we were on our way. No really good reason to call at all. It was just a "wave" or "howdy" call. Back in the days when cell phones cost a lot for every minute of use, people were a little slower to make chat calls. But now some companies are giving away a lot of minutes or charging what people think is a very low price, so more and more people are using cell phones just for casual chats, even in city traffic! Looking at the buttons is one problem. I think that there should be inexpensive programmable phones to eliminate the need to look away from traffic. There should be at least enough places in the program for storing emergency numbers (your boss, your doctor, your closest family member, and, of course, 911). Speakerphones are not practical in a car. You already get too much noise from the car itself to hear clearly or let the other person hear you. People who use speakerphones in a car are only torturing the person they are talking to at the other end. Some kind of device should be created to allow the person to position the phone so the hands are free to drive the car. Can they make an affordable fold-up headset? Because the cell phone companies are doing such a good job of selling these things, I think they should also spend some money to educate people about safety and the need to exercise common sense with the way they use their cell phones. We did hear on the news tonight that Brooklyn will not start ticketing people for driving while also using a cell phone until after they have erected signs in the city informing people about the law. Gail M. Hall gmhall@apk.net ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 12:30:14 -0800 Subject: Last Laugh! Make "Meli$$a" Fast! Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca I wasn't going to mention it if they weren't, but they have. One rather appalling discussion that I have seen regarding the new Melissa Word macro virus was on an Internet marketing newsletter, where the editor was exulting in this new marketing tool, seeing it as a kind of automatic spam. I am very much afraid that someone will be trying this, and probably very soon. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sort of a lousy April Fool joke isn't it? Perhaps he was speaking only in jest, but like you, I suspect it may be the start of 'second generation spam'. Someone pointed out re- cently (and it was reported in another message in this issue) that as fast as the anti-virus writers can produce a 'cure' for Melissa, some- one on the net thinks of a new way around it. All the more reason, it seems, for the massive government crackdown -- which so many netters see as just around the corner -- to happen. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #44 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 1 22:00:09 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA00643; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 22:00:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 22:00:09 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199904020300.WAA00643@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #45 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Apr 99 22:008:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 45 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Special Report: "Melissa" Macro Virus (Rob Slade) Melissa Virus Launch Identified (Monty Solomon) Managing Multiple PBX Sites (David J. Langlois) FCC Warns of Potential Y2K Phone Problems (Mike Pollock) Now Free Computers From an ISP! (jkdejanews@my-dejanews.com) Re: Followup on Free Computer Scam (Shelley McLeod) What is the Difference Between PDC and PHS (vvrk@my-dejanews.com) Pointer to FAQs or Web Site? (Gail M. Hall) Excellent Employment Opportunity Immediately Available (Marc Goldstein) Shutting Up Cell Phones (Monty Solomon) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson. You can reachme us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 16:51:23 -0800 Subject: Special Report: "Melissa" Macro Virus Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca A report prepared by Robert M. Slade The following is an attempt to bring together the information about the Melissa virus. It is taken from the most reliable available sources. Additional sites have been listed at the end of the article. I have not added a copyright line to this message in order to allow it to be used as needed. I will be posting the latest updated version of this article at http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade/melissa.txt and http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/melissa.txt. The virus, generally referred to as W97M.Melissa.A (with some variations: Symantec, in a rather strained effort to be cute, seems to be calling it "Mailissa"), is a MS Word macro virus. This means that, if you don't use Word, you are safe. Completely safe. (Except for being dependent upon other people who might slow their/your mail server down. More on that later.) If you need to look at MS Word documents, there is a document viewer available (free, as it happens) from Microsoft. This viewer will not execute macros, so it is safe from infection. In the messages about Melissa, there have been many references to the mythical and non-existent "Good Times" virus. Note that simply reading the text of a message still cannot infect you. However, note also that many mailers, in the name of convenience, are becoming more and more automated, and much of this automation concerns running attached files for you. As Padgett Peterson, author of one of the best macro virus protection tools, has stated, "For years we have been saying you could not get a virus just by "opening E-Mail. That bug is being fixed." Melissa does not carry any specifically damaging payload. If the message is triggered there will be text added to the active document. The mailout function can cause a large number of messages to be generated very quickly, and this has caused the shutdown of a number of corporate mail servers. If you have Word set with macros disabled, then the virus will not active. However, relying on this protection is a very dangerous proposition. Previous macro viruses have also killed macro protection in Word, and this one does as well. The name "Melissa" comes from the class module that contains the virus. The name is also used in the registry flag set by the virus. The virus is spread, of course, by infected Word documents. What has made it the "bug du jour" is that it spreads *itself* via email. We have known about viruses being spread as attachments to email for a long time, and have been warning people not to execute attachments (or read Word documents sent as attachments) if you don't know where they came from. Happy99 is a good example: it has spread very widely in the past month by sending itself out as an email attachment whenever it infects a system. Melissa was originally posted to the alt.sex newsgroup. At that time it was LIST.DOC, and purported to be a list of passwords for sex sites. I have seen at least one message theorizing that Melissa is someone's ill-conceived punishment for viewers of pornography. This hypothesis is extremely unlikely. Sending a virus to a sex related newsgroup seems to be a reliable way to ensure that a number of stupid people will read and/or execute your program, and start your new virus off with a bang. (No pun intended.) If you get a message with a Melissa infected document, and do whatever you need to do to "invoke" the attachment, and have Word on your system as the default program for .doc files, Word starts up, reads in the document, and the macro is ready to start. If you have Word's "macro security" enabled (which is not the default) it will tell you that there is a macro in the document. Few people understand the import of the warning, and there is no distinction between legitimate macros and macro viruses. Because of a technical difference between normal macros and "VBA objects," if you ask for a list of the macros in the document, Melissa will not show up. It will be visible if you use the Visual Basic Editor, but only after you have loaded the infected file. Assuming that the macro starts executing, several things happen. The virus first checks to see if Word 97 (Word 8) or Word 2000 (Word 9) is running. If so, it reduces the level of the security warnings on Word so that you will receive no future warnings. In Word97, the virus disables the Tools/Macro menu commands, the Confirm Conversions option, the MS Word macro virus protection, and the Save Normal Template prompt. It "upconverts" to Word 2000 quite nicely, and there disables the Tools/Macro/Security menu. Specifically, under Word 97 it blocks access to the Tools|Macro menu item, meaning you cannot check any macros. It also turns off the warnings for conversion, macro detection, and to save modifications to the NORMAL.DOT file. Under Word 2000 it blocks access to the menu item that allows you to raise your security level, and sets your macro virus detection to the lowest level, that is, none. (Since the access to the macro security menu item is blocked, I do not know how this feature can be reversed, other than programmatically or by reinstallation.) After this, the virus checks for the HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\Melissa?\ registry key with a value of "... by Kwyjibo". (The "kwyjibo" entry seems to be a reference to the "Bart the Genius" episode of the "Simpsons" television program where this word was used to win a Scrabble match.) If this is the first time you have been infected (and this "first time" business is slightly complicated), then the macro starts up Outlook, in the background, and sends itself as an attachment to the "top" 50 names in *each* of your address lists. (Melissa will *not* use Outlook Express.) Most people have only one (the default is "Contacts"), but if you have more than one then Outlook will send more than 50 copies of the message. Outlook also sorts address lists such that mailing lists are at the top of the list, so this can get a much wider dispersal than just fifty copies of the message/virus. There was also a mention on one message about MAPI and Exchange servers, which may give access to a very large number of mailing lists. From other reports, though, people who use Exchange mail server are being particularly hard hit. Then again, people who use Exchange are probably also standardized on Word and Outlook. Some have suggested setting this registry key as a preventative measure, but note that it only prevents the mailout. It does not prevent infection. If you are infected, and the registry key is removed at a later date, then a mailout will be triggered the next time an infected document is read. Once the messages have been sent, the virus sets the Melissa flag in the registry, and looks for it to check whether or not to send itself out on subsequent infections. If the flag does not persist, then there will be subsequent mass mailings. Because the key is set in HKEY_CURRENT_USER, system administrators may have set permissions such that changes made are not saved, and thus the key will not persist. In addition, multiple users on the same machine will likely each trigger a separate mailout, and the probability of cross infection on a common machine is very high. Since it is a macro virus, it will infect your NORMAL.DOT, and will infect all documents thereafter. The macro within NORMAL.DOT is "Document_Close()" so that any document that is worked on will be infected when it is closed. When a document is infected the macro inserted is "Document_Open()" so that the macro runs when the document is opened. Note that *not* using Outlook does not protect you from the virus, it only means that the 50 copies will not be automatically sent out. If you use Word but not Outlook, you will still be infected, and may still send out infected documents on your own. The virus also will not invoke the mailout on Mac systems, but definitely can be stored and resent from Macs. At this time I do not have reliable information about whether it can reproduce on Macs (there is one report that it does), but the likelihood is that it can. Vesselin Bontchev has noted that the virus never explicitly terminates the Outlook program. It is possible that multiple copies may be invoked, and may create memory problems. However, this has not been confirmed, and is not probable given the "first time" flag that is set. The message appears to come from the person just infected, of course, since it really is sent from that machine. This means that when you get an "infected" message it will probably appear to come from someone you know and deal with. The subject line is "Important Message From: [name of sender]" with the name taken from the registration settings in Word. The test of the body states "Here is that document you asked for ... don't show anyone else ;-)". Thus, the message is easily identifiable: that subject line, the very brief message, and an attached Word document (file with a .doc extension to the filename). If you receive a message of this form *DO NOT OPEN THE DOCUMENT WITH WORD!* If you do not have alternate means or competent virus assistance, the best recourse is to delete the message, and attachment, and to send a message to the sender alerting them to the fact that they are, very likely, infected. Please note all the specifics in this paragraph, and do not start a panic by sending warnings to everyone who sends you any message with an attachment. However, please also note that, as with any Word macro virus, the source code travels with the infection, and it will be very easy to create modifications to Melissa. (The source code has already been posted to one Web site.) We will, no doubt very soon, start seeing many Melissa variants with different subjects and messages. There is already one similar Excel macro virus, called "Papa." The virus contains the text "Fred Cohen" and "all.net," leading one rather ignorant reporter to assume that Fred was the author. Dr. Cohen was the first person to do formal research into viral programs. There is a message that is displayed approximately one time in sixty. The exact trigger is if the current system time minute field matches the current system time day of the month field when the virus is run. In that case, you will "Twenty-two points, plus triple-word-score, plus fifty points for using all my letters. Game's over. I'm outta here." typed into your document. (This is another reference to the "Simpsons" episode referred to earlier.) One rather important point: the document passed is the active document, not necessarily the original posted on alt.sex. So, for example, if I am infected, and prepare some confidential information for you in Word, and send you an attachment with the Word document, containing sensitive information that neither you nor I want made public (say, the fact that Bill Gates is a jerk for having designed the technology this way), and you read it in Word, and you have Outlook on your machine, then that document will be mailed out to the top 50 people in your address book. Rather ironically, a clue to the identity of the perpetrator may have come from the identification number embedding scheme recently admitted by Microsoft as having been included with Office and Windows 98. A number of fixes for mail servers and mail filtering systems have been devised very quickly. However, note that not all of these have fully tested or debugged. One version that I saw would trap most of the warning messages about Melissa. Note that any Word document can be infected, and that an infected user may unintentionally send you an infected document. All Word documents, and indeed all Office files, should be checked for infection before you load them. Information and antiviral updates (some URLs are wrapped): http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-99-04-Melissa-Macro-Virus.html http://www.ciac.org/ciac/bulletins/j-037.shtml ftp://ftp.complex.is/pub/macrdef2.zip http://www.complex.is/f-prot/f-prot.html http://chkpt.zdnet.com/chkpt/hud0007500a/www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/ news/0,4586,2233030,00.html http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/special/melissavirus.html http://www.symantec.com/techsupp/mailissa.html http://www.antivirus.com/vinfo/security/sa032699.htm http://www.avp.com/melissa/melissa.html http://www.microsoft.com/security/bulletins/ms99-002.asp http://www.sendmail.com/blockmelissa.html ftp://ftp.rubyriver.com/pub/jhardin/antispam/procmail-security.html http://www.innosoft.com/iii/pmdf/virus-word-emergency.html http://www.sophos.com/downloads/ide/index.html#melissa http://www.avertlabs.com/public/datafiles/valerts/vinfo/melissa.asp http://www.pcworld.com/cgi-bin/pcwtoday?ID=10302 http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article/0,1087,3_89011,00.html http://cnn.com/TECH/computing/9903/29/melissa.copycat.idg/ http://www.pcworld.com/cgi-bin/pcwtoday?ID=10308 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca robertslade@usa.net p1@canada.com Some people think I am naive and apathetic. I simply don't know what they mean, and I really don't care. http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 13:00:39 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Melissa Virus Launch Identified http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,34405,00.html By Stephen Shankland Staff Writer, CNET News.com March 29, 1999, 6:35 p.m. PT A poster called "Sky Roket" launched the Melissa virus into the wilds via the newsgroup alt.sex early Friday morning, antivirus company Network Associates said today. In addition, a copycat of Melissa called "Papa" was first posted in the alt.bondage newsgroup, said Sal Viveros, group marketing manager at Network Associates. After Network Associates heard about Melissa from a customer, its newsgroup-sniffing software was able to track down the point at which the virus first emerged, Viveros said. The company knows it was the first insertion into the world because the original file, "list.doc," had a creation date just a bit younger than the time it was inserted. Network Associates looked at the sex-related newsgroups because of the pornographic content of the "list.doc" file originally used to spread the Melissa virus, Viveros said. The file was initially posted at 4:15 a.m. Pacific time on Friday, he said. Sky Roket apparently has posted as far back as 1997 to other sex-related newsgroups with virus-infected files named things like "complete list of adult sites" and "complete list of cracked Web sites." The Melissa virus spreads using a combination of Microsoft Outlook and Microsoft Word. Major antivirus companies posted updates for their virus-checkers on their Web sites. However, experts cautioned that the characteristics of the virus are changing as programmers modify the Melissa programming instructions for their own viruses. "This is the fastest-spreading virus we've ever seen," Viveros said. "It's all over the world -- Asia, Europe, South Africa, New Zealand, Holland." Antivirus company Symantec said the speed of the Melissa propagation caught antivirus makers "off guard." While Viveros took issue with the statement, saying that Network Associates had its update available less than three hours after the company first heard of the virus, its software didn't protect against Melissa until that update was installed. Several of Network Associates' antivirus clients were infected with Melissa, including one site that had 60,000 users infected on Friday and other that had more than half a million infected emails in its system, Viveros said. "The writer was very clever," Viveros said. "This one is spreading rapidly because it's coming from a trusted source. Most of the other viruses use very generic text where it's easy to identify it's not from a trusted source. They don't spread as quickly." Melissa takes advantage of mailing lists in Outlook. One of the characteristics of the virus-writing community is that authors quickly adopt innovations. Indeed, Melissa.a, similar to Melissa but with a blank subject line, has been circulating. Papa is similar, though it uses Microsoft Excel instead of Word to propagate, but Viveros said it's relatively toothless because the author "broke" the replication code so it doesn't spread as effectively as Melissa. The quick-change nature of some viruses make them similar in some way to the human immodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus that causes AIDS. HIV's rapid mutation rate enables it to evade new detection and treatment technologies. However, Viveros said he was confident Network Associates' software will be able to catch future variants of Melissa. Though Melissa won't fully work on Windows computers without Outlook or on Macintoshes, the virus still can lie dormant on those machines if a user opens up a Melissa-infected Word file, Viveros said. In that scenario, Melissa would infect the computer and the template file Word uses to create new documents. If a new Word document then were sent to Windows user who did have Outlook and Word, a new round of Melissa mailings could result. And this time, the file it would piggyback on would be the new Word file instead of Melissa's original list of porn sites. That could be bad if the new Word document were a payroll list, for example. Copyright 1995-99 CNET, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy policy. ------------------------------ From: langlo6@ibm.net (David J. Langlois) Subject: Managing Multiple PBX Sites Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 14:37:11 GMT Organization: IBM Global Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services An organization I work for has multiple Meridian 1 PBX's in a city, plus another M1 located about 200 km away. Historically, each PBX was maintained by a resource on-site in each building. I made the comment that having one or two persons assigned for maintenance in each location was expensive, and could probably be done cheaper and with greater control if the maintenance and supervision functions were centralized. That comment caused a deluge of flak from the persons who actually do the work today, as I believe they are afraid of losing a job if the work is centralized and rationalized. If anyone on this list have any experience in centralizing and rationalizing the maintenance of PBX's, would you care to share your observations with me? Please email me directly at langlo6@ibm.net. Thanks, David J. Langlois Hudson, QC Canada [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I will not suggest that your situation is even close to that of Ameritech, but there are some similarities. Like yourself, Ameritech thought they could save a lot of money by cutting back on the number of people assigned essentially to the duty of watching and caring for a telephone central office switch during overnight and weekend hours. If you go back thirty or forty years, every telco had a local person on duty at all times. Generally the function known as 'repair service' was staffed right at the central office, 24 hours per day. Ameritech noted that with more and more computerized functions, repair could at first be staffed in a single central location in each city; then later, in each state. On dialing '611' the other day, I got someone who was no where near the central office I was in, or indeed, even in the same city. They were in Ohio somewhere. Lots of money being saved ... even if the switch itself is malfunctioning, a report can be taken on it a couple hundred miles away. But what really happens is that when the occassional major outage or disaster occurs, the remote people are often the last to find out. Consider Ameritech in May, 1988, eleven years ago this month. It was a Sunday, and Mother's Day. Rain and very high winds were causing numerous problems, and one of these problems was a series of 'false alarms' from the Ameritech central office in Hinsdale, IL to the monitoring station a couple hundred miles away in Springfield, IL. There were so many false alarms that in Springfield they simply started *ignoring* them. Then came a more serious alarm, and the single person on duty in Springfield called a supervisor at her home in another suburb of Chicago -- some 45 minutes away from Hinsdale -- and asked her, 'when you get time this afternoon would you go over to the office and see why the alarm keeps going off?' ... and a bit later the lady did leave her home and drive in the rain over to Lincoln Street in Hinsdale. She walked in the door, and was immediatly turned away because of thick, heavy smoke and flames ... she tried to use the phone there to call the Fire Department but to no avail; the phones were already totally dead. She ran outside and asked a person driving past to *please* go get the Fire Department, which did arrive shortly after that. The Ameritech Hinsdale central office, which carried a huge amount of very vital traffic burned to the ground. Everything inside was almost completely destroyed. By the time the firemen got finished the switch was full of water and useless. That office served the Federal Aviation control towers for Ohare Airport; it was the central hub for all cellular and paging services in the Chicago area; it was a major toll center for long distance calls. ... all in ashes ... So critical were some of these functions that the minute firemen allowed Ameritech employees into the building -- and hundreds of them had gathered outside by the time the fire was struck -- several repair techs waded through an inch of water on the floor and through the soot and ashes to some circuits for the FAA and immediatly spliced them in such a way that service could be restored to that subscriber. It took three or four days to restore service for police, fire and hospitals, about a week for long distance, and slightly over a month before the office was about 98 percent restored. Most people in the area were without dialtone for a month. A new switch cost them several million dollars when the old one could not be salvaged; they had litigation going on for several years; they spent millions of dollars in overtime pay for employees who worked around the clock -- quite literally some stayed for 18-24 hours at a time until they could not stay awake any longer -- but they saved themselves the expense of having a single person there around the clock. Penny-wise and pound-foolish we used to say. I reported this incident when it first happened here in the Digest. Check the archives for May, 1988 for details reported in several issues. Or, look at the archives file http://telecom-digest.org/history/fire.in.chicago5-88 for a report. I may reprint it sometime this month. Now, no delusions of grandeur: you don't come close. But if your PBX service is important to you and if there are situations or scenarios where a loss of service could cause harm to the company either in a financial or public relations sense, then you decide where to spend your money. If you can't justify two people at each location, then cut it back to one. If you cannot justify one person full time at each location, then assign that person other duties with the under- standing that the minute there is a problem, they are to drop what they are doing and attend to it. Never allow any PBX installation of any size at all to *ever* go unsupervised, and don't leave it up to someone remotely to hope they see the problem and find someone to fix it, etc. For Ameritech, the outage lasted a month. Could you deal with your company phone service being out even a day or two? Certainly watch over things remotely if you wish, but have someone on location ready to respond immediatly. Not only are two sets of eyes better than one, but many times the local person would have the problem fixed before you even saw it or were able to get it communi- cated locally. Don't be penny-wise and pound-foolish with PBXs. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: FCC Warns of Potential Y2K Phone Problems Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 12:39:32 -0500 FCC warns of potential Y2K phone problems Report says widespread phone outages are not expected -- but keep a cell phone handy. Associated Press March 31, 1999 8:19 AM PT WASHINGTON -- The year-2000 computer bug probably won't cause major telephone or television glitches, but people still should limit their use of phones and modems on Jan. 1, a government report says. In an analysis of how the so-called Y2K problem could affect communications, the Federal Communications Commission said large companies -- local telephone, long-distance, broadcast TV, radio, cable TV, satellite and wireless -- are making progress to fix their systems to accommodate the year 2000. "We ... are cautiously optimistic about the ability of these companies to withstand even unforeseen problems with minimum disruptions to the services they provide," the report, released Tuesday, concluded. These large companies -- whether providing telephone or television services -- serve most individuals and businesses. The top 20 local phone companies, for instance, provide service to more than 97% of all U.S. customers. But the report said some small- and medium-sized companies are lagging behind, largely because they lack the technical expertise and the money to make necessary changes, said FCC Commissioner Michael Powell, the agency's point man on the Y2K matter. Tips offered: The Y2K bug occurs because many computers programmed to recognize only the last two digits of a year won't work properly beginning Jan. 1, 2000, when machines might assume it is 1900. The FCC's goal is to make sure the quality and reliability of telephone and television services don't suffer on and after Jan. 1, Powell said. The report offers tips for avoiding or minimizing disruptions, such as limiting phone and modem use on Jan. 1, saying "heightened traffic volume could overtax the network." The reason: If every person in the U.S. at the same time made a call on Jan. 1 just to see whether it would go through, the telephone network -- which does have capacity limits -- would be overloaded, resulting in busy signals and delays, said Powell and John Koskinen, chairman of the president's council on year-2000 conversion. As for emergency calls to 911, Powell said "nothing we have seen yet suggests widespread problems." But he added: "We think it prudent to expect some delays in the call processing in some systems of 911 calls." He said problems could occur if local governments, which run 911 dispatch centers, don't fix their equipment. Cell phone standing by: The report also suggests that people have at least one telephone -- such as a cellular phone -- that doesn't require electricity and that they try to place important calls, particularly those overseas, before or after New Year's Day. Countries in Central and South America, for instance, face a "high risk" that their telecommunications systems will experience problems, the report said. U.S. phone companies rely on foreign carriers to complete calls to those countries. Although the report said large wireless companies appear to be on track with fixes and that the Y2K problem probably won't affect satellites in orbit, it also cautioned that some companies didn't disclose their progress preparing for problems. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let me see if I understand this correctly. In the event there are phone problems on January 1, 2000 since the phone central offices may be buggy, each person should have a cellular phone to use. Don't cellular phones also go through central office switches? Why will a cellular phone work better than a landline phone? A phone only 'works' when all the central offices in the path between it and the called telephone are operational. I don't think the writer of this article did his homework very well. I have to admit though, January 1 should be an interesting day to say the least. I suppose everyone dealing with this is glad that it is happening on Saturday rather than during the middle of the week. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jkdejanews@my-dejanews.com Subject: Now Free Computers From an ISP! Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 07:32:52 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion Hi all there, I came across something really interesting after I read a news item in one of the mailing lists. I visited www.gobi.com. These people offer free computer systems for subscribing their Internet services. An interesting marketing strategy. Comments? Krishnan iyer krishnan@infozech.com Infozech Software Private Limited Software Solutions for Telecom Service Providers Fax : +1-815-366-3058, +1-630-604-8787 http://www.infozech.com Telcomine : Free Monthly Newsletter on Telecom and Technology http://www.infozech.com/telcomine.html Free forum to answer your any queries on Telecom and Technology http:/www.infozech.com/forum.html Billing Solutions for Telecom Services http://www.infozech.com/solution.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would be very careful of such an offer. Has anyone here heard of 'gobi.com' before? Think about the economics here: a decent computer that at the very least costs a few hundred dollars wholesale -- vendor price -- for a subscription to an ISP where you pay around twenty dollars per month? I can see free software, I can see a free modem, but an entire computer? The net is just getting to be full of these 'free computer' deals lately and thus far they have been either MLM schemes or outright frauds. Find out what kind of computer, how many peripherals included, when it will be shipped, and read the fine print *carefully*. If they need a credit card to sign you up for a year of service, think that over carefully also and make sure you see their actual service in operation. One small telco actually advertises 'internet service' for twenty dollars per month and what they give you is a start page your computer dials into each time. Period. Hey, I will design a nice start page for anyone for about twenty dollars with some great links on it, etc. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Shelley McLeod Subject: Re: Followup on Free Computer Scam Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 19:33:17 GMT Organization: @Home Network Canada Regards the free computers, reported by TELECOM Digest Editor: This sounds like a classic pyramid sales scam. ------------------------------ From: vvrk@my-dejanews.com Subject: What is the Difference Between PDC and PHS Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 20:07:43 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion Hi All, I searched all the archive could not find any match. What is the difference between PDC and PHS ? Are they same or different. Do they support a bearer service like SMS? Is there any simple reference on the net related to either of these two standards. (if they are different). Cheers, Ravikanth Varahagiri ------------------------------ From: gmhall@apk.net (Gail M. Hall) Subject: Pointer to FAQs or Web Site? Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 05:24:55 GMT Organization: APK Net Hi Pat, I seem to remember that there used to be a Web site for the TELECOM Digest. I have looked through the messages in comp.dcom.telecom for the past several weeks and don't see such a thing posted to this newsgroup. Is there still a Web site where people can look up old messages and other telecom info? If so, could you please do us newsgroup readers a favor and post a pointer message to the newsgroup once a month or so? Even a four-line "sig" from the moderator in his own messages would be a way to do that. Thanks! Gail M. Hall gmhall@apk.net [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Every message which leaves here for Usenet comp.dcom.telecom carries a notation in the header that the URL is http://telecom-digest.org ... which, if you still prefer to use FTP translates as hyperarchives.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives. But I like it best if browsing that you go in through the front page at http://telecom-digest.org ... I get an idea of the traffic. If you go in elsewhere I won't kick you out or refer you back to the top however. Thanks for bringing this up, as it gives me a chance to mention a few changes there in recent days. Although the web chatroom is still available, a new java-based chat area is also there for use. Check out http://telecom-digest.org/chatroom.html to see it. I have also installed on that page a news ticker with constantly updating news which can be read during chats. You can use /search as a way to search the c.d.t. newsgroup (*not* the Digest) for articles, subjects and authors. You can read the c.d.t. newsgroup sorted in various ways at /TELECOM_Digest_Online. Last but not least, there have been so many people ask what I look like that I am also installing on the web page a talking picture of myself. After all these years, you will get to see what I look like and sound like. Check for my picture there in a few days. Also I hate to add this final note, but it will all look a lot nicer if you use Internet Explorer. Netscape will work, just not as well, and that is due to my own ignorance. I need someone to teach me how to recognize the browser and route it to scripts which will work. I am not biased against Netscape, I just can't make it work right with what I have done. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Marc Goldstein Subject: Excellent Employment Opportunity Immediately Available Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 09:26:23 -0500 K & M TEL, INC. SEEKS: Experienced Sales Professional Wanted Immediately for Senior Sales Position! Industry sales experience is essential, Central Office and Transmission equipment sales experience desirable. Must be self-motivated/goal oriented and a leader among peers. College Degree Preferred. K & M TEL, INC. is a growing service-oriented organization that buys and sells all types of refurbished, new and used transmission, central office, switching, power and outside plant equipment to the Telecommunications Industry. In addition, K & M TEL, INC. provides quality installation, deinstallation, consulting, engineering, warehousing and project management. A partial client list includes Bell South, AT&T, GTE, MCI WorldCom and Lucent Technologies. Relocation to area necessary and program will be discussed upon interview. Attractive Compensation Package for the right individual. For Immediate Consideration Please Forward Resumes with cover letter to: Attn: MG K&M TEL, INC. 2015 Broad Street Brooksville, FL. 34609 800-801-5262 Fax: 352-754-5053 www.k-mtel.com or info@k-mtel.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 02:44:31 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Shutting Up Cell Phones Shutting Up Cell Phones by Stewart Taggart If you want to neutralize pesky adversaries in wartime, disrupt their communications. If you want to do the same in peacetime, disable their mobile phones. By selling a frequency jammer that prevents mobile-phone communications over a limited area, an Israeli company has taken a classic swords-to-plowshares approach in commercializing a military technology. http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/18733.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How about disrupting computer service also? In recent days with the harsh reminders of the Vietnam era being tossed in our faces from Yugoslavia comes word that patriot-hackers there are doing their damndedest to keep NATO's computers, web pages and email out of service. A NATO spokesperson reported today on National Public Radio that their site was almost inaccessible due to the constant barrage of 'pings', spam email in voluminous quantities and other garbage being tossed at them from sites in Yugoslavia. It would not have happened in World War II would it? Nor Vietnam for that matter. But then in those days neither would we have awakened Thursday morning to news that only a few hours earlier, three young American men had been taken prisoners in the conflict. That news has left me feeling down all day. I certainly hope this does not turn into 'another Vietnam' but hearing about those guys taken prisoner left me with a very sick feeling, with my stomach churning. I saw what happened to our country during the 1960-70's; no one won, everyone lost, and it seemed to just go on forever. I hope I am wrong. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #45 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Thu Apr 1 23:42:15 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id XAA05809; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 23:42:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 23:42:15 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199904020442.XAA05809@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #46 TELECOM Digest Thu, 1 Apr 99 23:42:00 EST Volume 19 : Issue 46 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Nintendo UK Site Leaks Credit Card Info on the Web (Monty Solomon) Re: Watch Out! Sprint's Done it to the Consumer Again (Ron Walter) Re: V+H to Mileage? (Jude Crouch) Re: V+H to Mileage? (Col. G. L. Sicherman) Re: V+H to Mileage? (rugeeky2?) Re: Cellphones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, OH (Tucker) Re: Cellphones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, OH (Leslie) Re: Last Laugh! Make Meli$$a Fast! (John R. Levine) Electronic Device on Board Aircraft (Billy Harvey) Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God (Gordon S. Hlavenka) Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God (Brett Frankenberger) Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God (Alan Miller) Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God (Lowell Kim) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@telecom-digest.org * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441 Phone: 415-520-9905 Our archives are available for your review/research. The URL is: http://telecom-digest.org They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to archives@telecom-digest.org to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 13:26:44 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Nintendo UK Site Leaks Credit Card Info on the Web http://www.maccentral.com/news/9903/29.nintendo.shtml Staff Report, email@maccentral.com March 29, 1999, 4:15 pm ET In a surprising story, ComputerWorld - an IDG Communications publication -- reports that Nintendo, creators of the popular Nintendo 64 home gaming machine, has accidentally released customer credit card information and more over the Internet. According to the report, Nintendo's UK subsidiary exposed customer IP, email and postal addresses, their names, telephone numbers, and their credit card numbers including expiry dates. Don't think you're off the hook just because you bought your Nintendo product in the US, however. Customers affected include those from UK, continental Europe, the USA and Australia. Nintendo officials have not yet commented on the matter. Though this issue does not deal directly with Mac users, it is sure to be an important issue for many Internet consumers. UPDATE: The Register, out of the UK, reports that the Nintendo UK Web site offers an online shopping service, but an official Nintendo UK representative said that the site did not have official sanction from her company. "They certainly have not contacted us for approval," she said in the story. The story goes on to say that Nintendo has plans to create its own UK site and would "take action against infringement of its brand name, she added." The Register report makes no mention of credit card information being posted, just names, addresses and email addresses. http://www.idg.co.nz/nzweb/d3ea.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/990329-000009.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 17:20:09 -0600 From: ronw@capcittel.com (Ron Walter) Subject: Re: Watch Out! Sprint's Done it to the Consumer Again editor@telecom-digest.org wrote: > Really, that's my best suggestion for anyone reading this: when Sprint > stiffs you in a contract dispute or due to confusion over five > different service reps giving you five different versions of some plan > or another, then cease payments to them immediatly on any/all accounts > you have with them. Wait until it goes to collection -- if it ever > does -- and then tell the collection agency to let it go legal. If the > collection agency offers to try and straighten it out, let them try. I had to respond to this because of our own experience. In our situation, the above tactic worked against us. However, we were dealing with Worldcom and not Sprint. We had some disputes because Worldcom had been charging more than they were supposed to. We had the documentation. When nothing was resolved we moved most of our traffic to another carrier. Shortly thereafter came the evolution of the beloved PICC charge, and suddenly we were being hit for $2,000 per month in PICC charges on bills with only $200 per month usage. We had figured the same thing -- withholding payment -- would catch their attention. They filed suit against us (I guess we got their attention). A good portion of what we owed was legitimate. In discussions with our lawyers, we came to the following conclusions: 1.) If we went to court, it was very likely that we could get the amount we owed reduced to the right amount. 2.) Because a substantial portion of the bill was really owed by us, it would result in a judgment against us. 3.) With that judgment we would most likely have to pay Worldcom's legal fees. 4.) Legal fees add up quickly in a trial, especially considering their lawyers are far more expensive than ours. 5) The costs of legal fees and everything else would be far greater than what we saved by fighting it in court. We ended up agreeing to pay the full amount before it went to trial, as well as some legal fees. A small company like ours couldn't afford a battle like that, and they knew it. Hindsight says that if we had withheld the amount that was in dispute, we would have been a lot better off. Now, I know Sprint is a totally different animal than Worldcom, but before withholding funds in a dispute over long distance charges I thought it would be good for people to know our particular story. Thanks, Ron Walter Capitol City Telephone [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You raise a good point that I have noted here in the past but failed to mention this last time around. *Always* pay the amount you do in fact owe. Then discontinue using the service and *freeze* payments on the rest. Because of the time delay between making a call and getting the bill, you may in fact need to watch the next month's bill and make some limited payment on that one also. The important thing is to let what is not due under your contract with Sprint age out and go to collection. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jcrouch@pobox.com (Jude Crouch) Subject: Re: V+H to Mileage? Date: 31 Mar 1999 00:06:49 GMT Organization: Crouch Enterprises William Petrisko wrote: > What exactly are the V and H coordinates in the LERG? > ie: Can I determine mileage between CO's given just the V+H coordinates? > If so, how? The algorithm is called Great Circle. It has been written in many computer languages. Jude Crouch (jcrouch@pobox.com) - Computing since 1967! Crouch Enterprises - Telecom, Internet & Unix Consulting Oak Park, IL 708-848-0134 URL: http://www.pobox.com/~jcrouch ------------------------------ From: sicherman@lucent.com (Col. G. L. Sicherman) Subject: Re: V+H to Mileage? Date: 31 Mar 1999 03:26:51 GMT Organization: F. K. Dingy & Son In , bill@primenet.com wrote: > What exactly are the V and H coordinates in the LERG? A coordinate system for rate centers devised by J. K. Donald of Bell Labs. Given a rate center, you compute its spherical distances from two foci in Utah and Kentucky. Then you compute where the rate center would lie on a flat map with the same distances to the foci. Throw in a scaling factor to compensate for spherical distortion, translate the coordinates to make their values convenient, and you have V and H. There are programs for this in the archives of the Digest. > ie: Can I determine mileage between CO's given just the V+H coordinates? > If so, how? The coordinate system was designed just for this. The mileages aren't perfectly accurate but they're within a few percent for the 48 states. I think you just use Pythagoras on V & H, then divide by 2 and you've got the mileage. On consulting my copy of Grimmelmann's memo, I find that the correct scale is about sqrt(0.1) miles per V-H unit. This works out to 0.3162 miles, or 0.509 km. G. L. Sicherman work: sicherman@lucent.com home: colonel@mail.monmouth.com ------------------------------ From: rugeeky2 Subject: Re: V+H to Mileage? Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 18:09:52 -0500 Organization: up.net Somebody did an overlay of the US with V(ertical) and H(orizontal) lines spaced, I think, in one mile increments. You can find the distance by using the formula for the distance between two points, I think: Square root of [(V1-V2)sqrd+(H1-H2)sqrd] I forget the formal name for this, but check any high school algebra text. It was what they were trying to teach us when the smart ass kid would say, "Yeah, that's fine to know if you're a teacher, but what good is it in the real world?" Cheers! Joe ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, Ohio Date: 2 Apr 1999 01:23:28 GMT Organization: TTGCITN Communications, Des Moines IA and Rochester NY Reply-To: rtucker+replyto+199904@katan.ttgcitn.com In , Gail M. Hall spewed: > I'll state right up front that I have never used a cell phone and > don't know much about them. A lot of what you're looking for already exists ... it's just a matter of people shelling out a few dollars extra to get it. > Looking at the buttons is one problem. I think that there should be > inexpensive programmable phones to eliminate the need to look away > from traffic. There should be at least enough places in the program > for storing emergency numbers (your boss, your doctor, your closest > family member, and, of course, 911). There are ... every cellphone I've had in the last few years has one-touch dialing, where you just press and hold a button and it dials whatever memory location you've mapped to that button. Also, 9 is automatically mapped to 911. Mind you, I only use one brand of cellphone (Nokia), so I don't know about other brands. > Speakerphones are not practical in a car. You already get too much > noise from the car itself to hear clearly or let the other person hear > you. People who use speakerphones in a car are only torturing the > person they are talking to at the other end. Some kind of device > should be created to allow the person to position the phone so the > hands are free to drive the car. Can they make an affordable fold-up > headset? Who needs fold-up? :-) Right now, I'm wearing a Nokia HDC-9 headset, which consists of a bud in my ear, a microphone with a little answer/hangup button, and a cable leading to the bottom of my phone (Nokia 6190). I paid about $20 for it, but that was from someone who bought way too many of them and was trying to get rid of the extras -- retail price is, naturally, significantly higher. With this, both hands are free, and my head is aligned properly, and I can leave my phone somewhere away from my head (which absorbs RF and therefore occasionally causes problems getting stuff from phone to tower). > Because the cell phone companies are doing such a good job of selling > these things, I think they should also spend some money to educate > people about safety and the need to exercise common sense with the way > they use their cell phones. My carrier puts a nice blurb in the service manual. However, that's not quite enough, IMHO. It has some good points, but who reads the manual!? :-) > We did hear on the news tonight that Brooklyn will not start ticketing > people for driving while also using a cell phone until after they have > erected signs in the city informing people about the law. Which is good, especially if Brooklyn gets a lot of thru traffic (highways, interstates, and such). At least they're trying to solve a problem, instead of trying to make money. Ryan Tucker http://www.ttgcitn.com/~rtucker/ GSM/VM/Fax: +15157712865 Box 57083, Pleasant Hill IA 50317-0002 President, TTGCITN Communications Box 92425, Rochester NY 14692-0425 Please keep public threads public -- e-mail responses will be ignored. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The other day I saw a cellular *speaker phone* in use. You could lift a handset and talk in the regular way if desired, however if the phone was on its cradle then you just directed your speech toward a little microphone that could be clipped somewhere on the dashboard and listened to a speaker that was mounted on the side of the cradle. It was just like having someone sitting next to you in the car talking to you. It came from Motorola and appeared to be about five or six years old. Instead of a mere 800 plus channels, the documentation said the phone was capable of 2142 channels provided the carrier offered that many. It would use them automatically if so, but otherwise the usual 800 were available. I think the user had to set one or two bits in the programming to use those extras. PAT] ------------------------------ From: EdLeslie@EDU.YorkU.CA (Ed Leslie) Subject: Re: Cell Phones Not to be Used in Moving Vehicles in Brooklyn, Ohio Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 02:43:16 GMT Organization: @Home Network Canada On Thu, 01 Apr 1999 05:24:56 GMT, gmhall@apk.net (Gail M. Hall) wrote: > Looking at the buttons is one problem. I think that there should be > inexpensive programmable phones to eliminate the need to look away > from traffic. There should be at least enough places in the program > for storing emergency numbers (your boss, your doctor, your closest > family member, and, of course, 911). I have a service on my Bell Moblility cellphone here in Toronto, Ontario, Canada called Wildfire. I dial the Wildfire access number (i.e. from a speedial) and after that, everything is voice operated. I can tell Wildfire "Call" and it asks me to say the name of the person/place I wish to call, or to say "Number". If I say "Number" it asks me to speak the number "five-five-five-one-two-one-two", says it back to confrm and then dials for me. If it is busy/unanswered, I say "Wildfire!" and it responds "Here I am", and I tell it to "Hang Up". For pre-stored numbers, I say the name, it confirms, and then asks where I wish to call them (the storage has space for home, work, mobile, cell, etc). Very slick -- and no buttons to push. If I have voice messages, I'm told such, and can use commands like "Describe it" to get the message envelope, "What's it say" to hear the message, "Call them back" to return the call if the caller left a number, and so on. *VERY* slick package. > Speakerphones are not practical in a car. You already get too much > noise from the car itself to hear clearly or let the other person hear > you. People who use speakerphones in a car are only torturing the > person they are talking to at the other end. Some kind of device > should be created to allow the person to position the phone so the > hands are free to drive the car. Can they make an affordable fold-up > headset? I have an earpiece with built-in mike that works pretty well. It has a large "clip" that goes around the back of the ear (like the end of an eyeglasses arm), with a bud speaker in the ear, and a short boom pointing toward my mouth. Works pretty well (this is on a Sony PCS phone). So, most if not all of what you're after is "out there". :-) EdLeslie@TorFree.NET ------------------------------ Date: 1 Apr 1999 20:51:40 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Make "Meli$$a" Fast! Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA > Melissa Word macro virus was on an Internet marketing newsletter, > where the editor was exulting in this new marketing tool, seeing it as > a kind of automatic spam. I am very much afraid that someone will be > trying this, and probably very soon. I got news for you. The Melissa worm IS automatic spam. The document in which the self-propagating Word macros were embedded touted a bunch of X-rated web sites. Due to bugs, the worm tended to attach itself to whatever documents were already open, but the intention was clearly to send automated spam. John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 johnl@iecc.com, Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 10:34:54 EST Subject: Electronic Device on Board Aircraft From: Billy Harvey Carl Moore writes: > We've been through discussion about such devices on airplanes, > regarding possible interference with the aircraft communication > system. Even with such devices turned off, do the wireless signals > (for *incoming* pages and cellular calls) still make it into the > aircraft? A turned-on cellu- lar phone can make outgoing calls and I > can understand concern about unfamiliar devices causing said > interference, but if *incoming* signals make it into the aircraft, is > any interference caused by connection to said devices? (I'm thinking > it might be seen as harder to enforce "incoming allowed but no > outgoing", and the atmosphere for such an inquiry might be poisoned by > recent incidents like those people trapped in airplanes on the tarmac > for several hours in Detroit?) You do see phones being available on > some aircraft, and presumably they have been cleared of any > interference (does the airline make money on such calls?). Carl, it's not normally a concern with the signal strength external to the aircraft penetrating and causing interference, as that's usually very weak except in the immediate vicinity of very large antennae arrays. The concern aboard an aircraft is is twofold. First, our cellular system was not designed to allow a single transmitter (the cell phone) to reach multiple antennae. If one or a few cell phones were in use while airborne, it wouldn't cause many problems, but as I'm sure everyone here suffers from even on the ground I can't drive anywhere without observing a large number of people using their cell phones. On board an aircraft, when a single phone could easily reach dozens of receivers, it would create havoc if tens of thousands of them were in use in the air at once. If the system had been designed differently, that would not be a problem, however it's too late to redesign that I think. The second problem is of more concern to the aircraft commander. In spite of what the captain says to you about you enjoying the flight, his greater concern is that you and he live through it. There are two parts to this concern. First, the aircraft was not designed for randomly placed transmitters throughout the cabin to be in use without causing interference. Sure, one or two in use in an aircraft probably wouldn't cause a problem, but perhaps a dozen would. Even testing the multiple locations and multiple signal strength levels possible would cost a fortune, and would need to be done for each individual aircraft if there was anything unique from one to the other, and there always is. Second, a cellular phone was not designed to a stringent enough level to not leak on frequencies other than the transmit and receive frequencies. Randomly emitted radio energy of the strength a cell phone, or even a GameBoy, can transmit can easily cause equipment malfunction on board an aircraft. And finally, to address your question of whether or not interference can be caused by the simple reception of signals by devices, the answer is yes. Indeed, a receiver, without even the ability to transmit, can cause interference simply by being turned on. The use of laptop computers is a calculated risk. While use is allowed in certain flight regimes, if everyone on board were using one at the same time, a stronger possibility exists that interference could occur. The innards of any electronic device, unless carefully built, tested, and *individually certified*, which includes dates of recertification estimated based on a history of failure of such devices, are not known to be safe. Allowing a controllable event that is of unknown risk to occur simply in the name of convenience is negligent. Billy ------------------------------ From: Gordon S. Hlavenka Reply-To: nospam@crashelex.com Organization: Crash Electronics, Inc. Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 09:49:18 -0600 Carl Moore wrote: > We've been through discussion about such devices on airplanes, > regarding possible interference with the aircraft communication > system. Even with such devices turned off, do the wireless signals > (for *incoming* pages and cellular calls) still make it into the > aircraft? A turned-on cellu- lar phone can make outgoing calls and I > can understand concern about unfamiliar devices causing said > interference, but if *incoming* signals make it into the aircraft, is > any interference caused by connection to said devices? Not much of the incoming signal makes it into the cabin. However, that's not the problem. The problem is that most (probably all) of these devices use a "super-heterodyne" ("superhet") receiver. This kind of receiver generates a tunable RF signal (The "Local Oscillator", or "LO"), and mixes it with the incoming signal. The difference between the two signals is what's actually used to receive information. What happens with superhet receivers is some of the LO signal is radiated from the receiver's antenna, whenever the receiver is turned on. With an airplane full of LO signals, on a multitude of frequencies, the blending of all that stray RF can produce signals which _could_ interfere with aircraft navigation equipment. Any one individual device is probably OK, but with dozens of them operating together the random combinations could produce virtually anything. > You do see phones being available on some aircraft, and presumably > they have been cleared of any interference (does the airline make > money on such calls?). Definitely "yes" to both questions. Gordon S. Hlavenka www.crashelex.com nospam@crashelex.com Grammar and spelling flames welcome. Yes, that's really my email address. Don't change it. ------------------------------ From: brettf@netcom.com (Brett Frankenberger) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God Organization: Netcom Online Services, Inc. Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 03:23:37 GMT In article , Carl Moore wrote: > We've been through discussion about such devices on airplanes, > regarding possible interference with the aircraft communication > system. Even with such devices turned off, do the wireless signals > (for *incoming* pages and cellular calls) still make it into the > aircraft? Only if the pager/cell phone is on :) > A turned-on cellular phone can make outgoing calls and I > can understand concern about unfamiliar devices causing said > interference, but if *incoming* signals make it into the aircraft, is > any interference caused by connection to said devices? (I'm thinking > it might be seen as harder to enforce "incoming allowed but no > outgoing", and the atmosphere for such an inquiry might be poisoned by > recent incidents like those people trapped in airplanes on the tarmac > for several hours in Detroit?) The theory is the RF generated by the local oscillator in the receiver may cause problems. Receiving a radio signal essentially consists of filtering out all the frequencies you aren't interested in, then demodulating what's left. It turns out that doing so is easier if you shift everything to a lower frequency first. This is done by combining the received signal from the antenna with the output of a local oscillator operating at some frequency (just putting out a sine wave). (Combining is deliberately vague. It's called different things depending on what year you went to engineering school.) These days, I'm not sure how relevant that really is. I can't use my pager (a rather high-frequency local oscillator) or my AM radio (a rather low-frequency local oscillator), but I can use my laptop, which has a clock with a frequency that is somewhere between the LO in a pager or an AM radio. I suspect, but have no evidence to support it, that a Laptop puts out at least as much RF as my pager or an AM radio. > You do see phones being available on some aircraft, and presumably > they have been cleared of any interference Yes. They've tested, found it safe, and presumably given the captain access to a circuit breaker that will shut them off. Not so for anything I may carry on. >(does the airline make money on such calls?). Of course. (I'm not privvy to the agreements -- they may make their money per call, or it may be a flat-fee lease-of-space. I dunna.) > (I remembered seeing something -- not in the Digest? -- long ago about > the President of the U.S. being able to respond, from 30,000 feet up, > to a breaking development. Sure. But it's using comm gear that was designed for and tested in his aircraft. He's not using a personal cell phone that the Air Force has never seen before. > And we just heard of the plane carrying the Russian premier turning > around in flight.) A pager, on an airplane or anywhere else, cannot > send outgoing signals. Just about everything these days can and does send outgoing signals. It's just not generally all that intentional. - Brett (brettf@netcom.com) ... Coming soon to a | Brett Frankenberger .sig near you ... a Humorous Quote ... | brettf@netcom.com ------------------------------ From: ajm@enteract.com (Alan Miller) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 18:11:59 -0600 Organization: Fencepost Software Carl Moore (cmoore@ARL.MIL) wrote: > We've been through discussion about such devices on airplanes, > regarding possible interference with the aircraft communication > system. Even with such devices turned off, do the wireless signals > (for *incoming* pages and cellular calls) still make it into the > aircraft? This gets some discussion in sci.geo.satellite-nav on a semi-regular basis, with people wondering about GPS receivers. The general answer is that the passive antennas used in receivers of this type (presumably something similar is in pagers) also re-radiate signals. In addition, the pager does have a simple processor in it, which may also cause interference. Overall, I suspect that pagers are probably pretty safe anyway; given their low power usage (one reason you don't have to remove the battery from your watch) it's unlikely that they'd radiate enough to cause problems. ajm ------------------------------ Date: 31 Mar 1999 13:30:29 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: lowellkim@aol.com (Lowellkim) Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Not a Thing For the House of God TELECOM Digest Editor noted: > It seems a shame when we cannot get away from the rest of the world > for a short time each week, whether it is for good music, meditation > or whatever, and that we must stay in touch, no matter what. Are any > of us *that important* to the rest of the world? PAT] No, we're not. It's just that some people don't realize it yet. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #46 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 14 00:15:33 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id AAA08383; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 00:15:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 00:15:33 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199904140415.AAA08383@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #47 TELECOM Digest Wed, 14 Apr 99 00:15:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 47 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Archives Renovation Mostly Complete (TELECOM Digest Editor) Woman Yanks Cord on Telemarketer (Monty Solomon) Shocked Man Rings Up $43 Million Phone Bill (Jeff Colbert) Glitch Causes 4 Billion Euro Overdraft (Monty Solomon) UCLA Summer Short Courses on Technical Management (Bill Goodin) Book Review: "Understanding Digital Subscriber Line Technology" (R. Slade) Help Needed With Definition (Ashley West) Do LD Companies Sell Subscriber Lists to Telemarketers? (John Meissen) Seeking Information on Company (Nicolas Reisini) Who Invented the Telephone? (Paul Pacini) Saved By The Bell - Cell Phone Stops Bullet (Jeff Colbert) Hypocrisy in Europe (Spiro Dreamer) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications 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, 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:26:23 EDT From: TELECOM Digest Editor Subject: Archives Renovation Mostly Complete Over the past couple weeks, I have spent a bit of time making some improvements to the Telecom Archives web site http://telecom-digest.org and request that readers check it out at this time. The latest changes were Tuesday afternoon; if you have not been there since sometime early Tuesday, you missed the latest 'fine tuning'. Praise is fine, but I am more interested in bugs found, complaints about the layout, etc. For those of you who asked about what I look like, you can now see an eight minute audiovisual presentation as part of your visit. Other new additions include a Y-2-K countdown clock, background music for Internet Explorer users (Netscape users will be taken care of soon I hope, it is a problem with MIME configs at lcs.mit.edu), the addition of a multiple-engine search service, a newswire ticker as part of the chat room, and a couple other minor things. Large parts of it are strung together through javascripting, and this being my first attempt at writing javascripts, I am still somewhat unsure of the end results. So that there is no misunderstanding later, I do hand you a cookie on your visit and ask for one back on your subsequent visits. It is a harmless cookie used for esthetic and amusement reasons only; it places your name, the number of times you have visited, etc in the header of the main page. You are free to decline it or erase it later if you wish. You are also free to do a raw dump of the various pages and examine (and comment upon) the javascripts I coded. If you know java well, and I am sure some of you do, **I highly value your comments, your re-write of the script in more effecient ways, etc** I am sure any professional web page designer could do a better job than I did. I suggest if you have both major browsers, try Internet Explorer first, version 4 or higher. *Then* use Netscape. I have a long ways to go before I will be happy with it, and maybe if you know how to write the type of scripts I did there, you can do it a lot better. I do want replies, comments, etc. http://telecom-digest.org Thanks! Patrick Townson ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 01:12:18 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Woman Yanks Cord on Telemarketer http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cte860.htm 04/12/99- Updated 11:02 AM ET By Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY WASHINGTON -- Diana Mey beat them. When telemarketers interrupted family dinners time and time again at the Mey house in Wheeling, W.Va., the stay-at-home mom fought back in court and won. Even when the home improvement company making the calls filed a retaliatory lawsuit that left her fearful her family would lose its home, she persevered. "Even though I was scared all along, I wanted to try to get them to think before they do this to someone else again," Mey says. With three sons under the age of 15, Mey, 40, was no stranger to the phone's daily ring -- but three or four times a day, the call was one of the more than 21 million telemarketing calls daily in the USA. "I started out really trying to be courteous," Mey says, "but most of the time, they wouldn't take no for an answer." Frustrated, she looked on the Internet for information during Christmas vacation in 1997. A search turned up the Junkbusters Web site (www.junkbusters.com), dedicated to helping consumers cut down junk mail and calls. There she read about the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, a federal law that specifies what telemarketers may and may not do. On the site is a series of questions consumers can ask telemarketers to make sure they're complying with the law -- and to get on the federally mandated "do not call" lists that all telemarketers must maintain. "If telemarketers have scripts, consumers can, too," says Mey, who printed out a copy and kept it near her phone. In a burst of enthusiasm, she got out one of her son's notebooks and began keeping a log. On Jan. 5, 1998, the first call from American Home Improvement Products of Monroeville, Pa., came, describing the joys of vinyl siding. She asked, politely, for the company to put her on its "do not call" list, which the caller agreed to do. Two weeks later, she was surprised to get a call from the same company -- during her son's birthday party. Thinking it was a mistake, Mey wrote a letter to the company, explaining what had happened. In a response, American Home Improvement said it wasn't accountable under the 1991 law because it wasn't soliciting sales but merely making appointments. "I thought after the letter I'd written that I wouldn't hear from them again," she says. Wrong. On April 3 she received a third call about siding. This time she called the West Virginia attorney general's office to learn that, indeed, the company was subject to the law. She then called the company's Morgantown, W.Va., satellite office. First she asked whether she could tape the call, which is legal under state law. Then she asked that the company fax her a copy of its "do not call" policy, which by law must be available. She says the supervisor said, "I've been with the company for three years, and I've never heard of that." That's when Mey got mad. She wrote a second letter, asking for a response within 10 days. When that didn't come, she marched down to small-claims court in April 1998 to sue for $4,000 under multiple violations of the 1991 federal law. Much legal wrangling followed. But it wasn't until Mey was informed that American Home Improvement was countersuing her for wiretap violations for a minimum of $10,000 compensatory and punitive damages that she considered getting a lawyer. "My husband was very upset," she says. "He sat down with me and said, 'Please tell me we're not going to lose the house.'" Fearing bankruptcy, Mey called Jonathan Turak, the father of one of the boys in the Scout troop she led. A lawyer in nearby Moundsville, W.Va., Turak took the case on contingency. "They thought they could come down here into our little community and have their way. They hired one of the biggest defense firms in Pittsburgh," Turak says. Jason Catlett of Junkbusters recalls getting an e-mail from Mey that weekend: "She was terrified, and rightly so. The idea that the court should punish her for collecting documentation on the telemarketers' wrongdoings is just deeply offensive." Eventually, American Home Improvement's countersuit was thrown out because it exceeded the limits of small-claims court. At this point, Mey was willing to end the process for $4,000 -- if the president of the company would apologize in person. After a few months of back and forth, the company's lawyers informed her he was "too busy to apologize," she says. So last month she filed a countersuit for $45,000, for malicious prosecution and abuse of legal process. "They didn't want anyone to believe they could sue them and set a precedent and get away with it," Turak says. "Well, thank God for the Mrs. Meys of the world." Last week, at the Computers, Freedom & Privacy conference in Washington, a room full of privacy advocates honored Mey for her courage. "It's only a heroic person like Diana Mey who goes to the enormous lengths required to protect her privacy," Catlett says. In February, American Home Improvement was purchased by Sears, which seems astonished at what has happened. On Friday, Sears contacted Mey's attorney to discuss an out-of-court settlement. "We would like to applaud her for standing up for what she believed in," Sears spokesman Tom Nicholson says. "We want to provide products and services to customers on their terms and at their convenience." ------------------------------ From: Jeff Colbert Subject: Shocked Man Rings Up $43 Million Phone Bill Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 18:10:07 GMT SAO PAULO (Reuters) - A Sao Paulo resident reeled when his ank rang him over his March telephone bill. It totaled $43 million. "I was horrified," said Nelson Marotti Filho, 42. "My bank called me to ask what I wanted to do with the bill. They usually deduct it directly from my account." After a hasty call the Sao Paulo telephone company mailed him a new, corrected bill for just $31. It was the latest blunder for the company, bought by Spain's Telefonica in a trophy privatization last year. Even Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso attacked the company on national radio last Friday after regulators found it guilty of cutting lines and switching numbers without notification. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 01:16:57 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Glitch Causes 4 Billion Euro Overdraft April 12, 1999 Web posted at: 3:23 p.m. EDT (1923 GMT) by Mary Lisbeth D'Amico MUNICH (IDG) -- Although the January switch to the single European currency was smooth at most European banks, a prominent German discount bank and its customers this week were acutely aware that not all possible euro-caused glitches have been found. Customers of Bank 24, a discount bank owned by Deutsche Bank AG, were astonished Tuesday evening to find that their securities accounts appeared to be overdrawn to the tune of 4 billion euro ($4.32 billion). An oversight connected to the change to the euro was responsible for an error this week, which affected 55,000 customers. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9904/12/overdraft.idg/ ------------------------------ From: Bill Goodin Subject: UCLA Summer Short Courses on Technical Management Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 15:28:03 -0700 This summer, UCLA Extension will present the following technical management short courses on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. July 7-9, 1999, "The Engineer in Transition to Management". The instructor is Ronald G. Read, MSME, PE, Director of Process Development World Wide, ITT Cannon, $1195. July 20-23, 1999, "Project Management Principles and Practice". The instructor is Arnold M. Ruskin, PhD, PE, PMP, Partner, Claremont Consulting Group and Technical Manager, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, $1495. August 16-18, 1999, "Inventing, Patenting, and Licensing". The instructor is Patrick MacCarthy, PhD, Consultant on Product Development and Inventing; and Professor of Chemistry, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, $1295 (combined price, $1695). August 19-20, 1999, "Technical Proposal Management and Marketing Strategy to Win New Business". The instructors are Bruce R. Elbert, MSEE, MBA, Senior Vice President, Business Development, Hughes Space and Communications International; and Robert S. Frey, MA, Director of Knowledge Management and Proposal Development, RS Information Systems, $795 (combined price, $1695). September 19-24, 1999, "The 58th Technical Management Program", with multiple instructors, $2295. For additional information and complete course descriptions, please visit our web page, http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses/, or contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu All of these courses may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ From: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 08:26:33 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Understanding Digital Subscriber Line Technology" BKUNDSLT.RVW 990307 "Understanding Digital Subscriber Line Technology", Thomas Starr/John M. Cioffi/Peter J. Silverman, 1999, 0-13-780545-4 %A Thomas Starr %A John M. Cioffi %A Peter J. Silverman %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1999 %G 0-13-780545-4 %I Prentice Hall %O +1-201-236-7139 fax: +1-201-236-7131 %P 474 p. %T "Understanding Digital Subscriber Line Technology" There is relatively little understanding conveyed in this book. Oddly, there is relatively little about DSL, as such, either. While chapter one is entitled "DSL Fundamentals," the basic concepts are not well explained, beyond the facts, gleanable if you are a professional, that it involves copper wire, high data rates, and is probably asymmetric. A number of types of Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) technologies are enumerated in chapter two. Twisted pair transmission physics is primarily of interest to cable plant engineers, and so is the very lengthy chapter three. The comparison with other media, in chapter four, is very short. As with much of the other material, the look at duplexing, in chapter five, mixes specification and power equations with simplistic presentation of the concepts. Chapter six's review of encoding methods is highly theoretical, and, again, deals more with power than data. Chapter seven does talk about data, and the theoretical distance between data points. A highly academic discussion of channel identification and initialization comprises chapter eight. Since a lot of the foregoing has not really talked about DSL, it is not surprising that the overview of DSL management, in chapter nine, is so short. And, since we know that DSL is going to be strictly confined to the physical layer, it isn't odd that chapter ten's comparison with the OSI (Open System Interconnection) model is very terse. The use of the term "bit pump" in the title for chapter eleven sounded exciting, but it really only talks about subdivided channels over a DSL link. Chapters twelve and thirteen are quick looks at using DSL channels to transmit ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode) and frame relay cells. It is only in chapter fourteen that we start to get into actual ADSL (Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line) usage, and even there it only looks at different configurations of customer premises equipment. Chapter fifteen supposedly deals with network architecture and regulation, but simply lists various service options. Chapter sixteen lists some of the major standards bodies. No audience is specified in the book, but it is safe to say that the layman did not figure in the authors' minds while they wrote. Some telco engineers, planning DSL installations, may find some of it useful. Possibly those contemplating the design of new and unspecified DSL transmission equipment may find some of the math to be helpful. Engineering profs setting group projects, such as implementing DSL from scratch, could use it as reference material. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKUNDSLT.RVW 990307 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com `Notwithstanding'--that is the metaphor for Canada - A Fotheringham http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ Reply-To: femvest@trail.com From: Ashley West Subject: Help Needed With Definition Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 14:35:01 -0600 Help! I have to explain to my students what net plant is! Thanks, Ashley West ------------------------------ From: John L. Meissen Subject: Do LD Companies Sell Subscriber Lists to Telemarketers? Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 10:14:54 -0700 I have a second phone line dedicated for my computer. I also use it for faxes. I recently switched long distance providers from MCI to ATT. Prior to that I would log about one call every three or four days on that line. The system logs them as "Ring detected without successful handshake". Within three days of placing the call to ATT sales the number of calls has jumped to four or five per day, and has stayed at that level for almost a month now. Of course, I don't really know who's calling since the modem answers on the first ring :-) john- [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suspect they do, but could not prove it. I will tell you who else sells things they should stay away from: America On Line apparently has arrangements to provide every single new screen name to some spam outfits. Consider this experience: my personal AOL account is under my real name, although I rarely use AOL for anything at all. I had occassion about a month ago to set up a new screeen name for a single mailing to help out a non-profit group here locally. The screen name was totally off the wall, just picked out of the blue. Within about *five minutes, maybe less* approximatly a dozen spams hit the mailbox. This is even before any outgoing mail left AOL, so the name could not have been picked up elsewhere along the net, etc. Five or six of the spams were promoting an adult web site, the others were variations on make money fast. And since that point in time, there has been not a single piece of mail to that screen name, except for the one or two pieces of mail expected by the group I was helping. Now, you try and convince me that AOL did not either generate those spams or provide the new screen name to whoever did. Who else could it have been with a dozen spams all hitting the mailbox a few seconds apart over a period of a couple minutes, within five minutes of AOL okaying the new screen name? Someone did say to me they had 'reasonable evidence' that AOL does indeed own a couple of adult web sites they won't admit to (owned by some subsidiary, etc). PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 09:46:28 -0400 Subject: Seeking Information on Company From: "Nicolas Reisini" Dear Sir: I am totally frustrated in my search for information concerning a company ( CommcoTec ) that I understand is currently providing "wireless fiber" service in New York City. I understand that they have 38GHZ licenses. I have searched high and low and just cannot find any contact info, a web page, NUTTIN ! Can you help-? Thanks in advance, Nic Reisini act.nyc.ny.us wall-street.nyc.ny.us techinvest.com us-directory.com ------------------------------ From: Paul Pacini Subject: Who Invented the Telephone? Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 12:47:51 -0500 I read once that a man by te name of Antonio Meucci, who was born in Florence, Italy and moved to the USA had invented a telephone in 1857. Do you know anything about this claim? [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'official' inventor of the telephone was Alexander Graham Bell, in 1877. He is the person we officially recognize since he was granted the patent. However, we also know that there two or three other people who claimed to be the inventor. We know that the day Bell went to the Patent Office someone else was there about the same time also wishing to patent the same invention. We know that the next day a third person went to the Patent Office with the same claims, demanding that he get the patent instead of Bell. Certainly there were others whose work was examined by Bell in his own labors. And Bell's work was no secret. The newspapers talked about things he was working on, as they did with other inventors of the era. Some have suggested that the now-infamous quote by 'an unnamed executive at Western Union' in the same year (something to the effect that WUTCO considered the telephone to be a worthless device, and they had no interest in aquiring the rights to it or the patent) was really a ploy intended to keep Bell and his investors off guard about WUTCO 'trying to take over' in the same way that Theodore Vail and his tiny little AT&T would do twenty years later. They wanted Bell and his people to not notice while *they* worked feverishly to complete their phone and get to the Patent Office before Bell. I somehow remember the name 'Meucci' as a person who did make some improvements in *telegraphy* around the late-middle of the 19th century. Any reader comments? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jeff Colbert Subject: Saved By The Bell -- Cell Phone Stops Bullet Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 18:00:14 GMT (Reuters) - Brazil has one of the world's worst telephone systems, but Brazilian Francisco de Assis Ferreira Neto stopped complaining the day his cellular telephone connected with a stray bullet headed for his chest. "This is the lucky telephone. Thanks to it I'm alive," Neto, 48, told O Globo newspaper in an interview published Friday. The taxi driver had been riding a bus in downtown Rio de Janeiro last Tuesday, when a stray bullet from a failed robbery shot through an open window and lodged in the cellular telephone he was carrying inside a leather briefcase under his arm. "The thief shot and fled. It was then that I felt the impact," Neto said. He looked inside his case and found his cellular telephone twisted out of shape with a 38-caliber bullet wedged between the keypad and the battery. ------------------------------ From: Spiro Dreamer Subject: Hyprocisy - Telecommunications During Wars Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 23:51:11 +1000 Organization: OzEmail Ltd. NATO is currently destroying TV transmitters in Yugoslavia under the excuse that they are used for military purposes. However, NATO has not even touched the Yugoslav telecommunications system (PTT) - no telephone exchanges have been targeted and even a huge, visible, easy target such as a set of satellite earth stations in Ivanica, 250 km south of Belgrade, has not been targeted. All telephony links within and outside of Yugoslavia are working perfectly. Further, the number of international lines to Yugoslavia has increased over the last two weeks, due to a ten-fold increase in the traffic. It was never so easy to get a connection. The public telco system is more likely to be used by the military (for non-secure military communications) than the TV. So, why has the TV been targeted whilst the telephone system is working so well, and even better????? Very simple - the TV is owned by the Yugoslavs and their government, whilst the telecommunication system is 49% owned by an Italian telecommunications company!!!!! Whilst NATO is sending bombers on Yugoslavia from its Italian bases, Italian business is happily making a good business by selling telco services to the worried families of Albanians and Serbs who live overseas. AND THE BUCK KEEPS SPINNING Spiro Dreamer [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You may have a valid point. I can tell you that the situation there is becoming more atrocious day after day. The orth tlantic reaty rganization, formed as an alliance between the United States and several European countries at the end of World War II is I think overstepping its bounds a little. I see this going more and more in the direction of Vietnam every day, don't you? Sometime around 2010, (gee, it seems strange to make the first number of a year '2' instead of '1' doesn't it?) after this has been going on for eleven years or so, compliments of still another Democratic president (remember, Kennedy got Vietnam going in earnest and Johnson stepped right in without missing a beat) perhaps some talking head on the television (or whatever we have then for mass viewing) will note that the 'conflict' -- the only authority to declare 'war' lies with Congress and they did not make such a declaration in Korea, Vietnam and now Yugoslavia -- has been going on longer than the one in Vietnam. Of course by then, ground troops will have been there for a decade, fifty thousand young guys will have died there and our society will be in tatters because of demonstrations and riots in the streets here by people wanting the United States out of it. We are looking at another Vietnam. I saw one Vietnam in my lifetime, dear God don't make me live through another one. In the early 1970's I participated in a memorial service to those who had already died in Vietnam. The name of every person who had died in the war was recited in a ceremony that lasted over 24 hours at the Chicago Temple. After some introductory remarks the reading of names began, with readers on stage for thirty minutes at a time, one name about every five seconds. As your reading period came to an end, a new person came to the podium from stage-right, the current reader walked way to stage-left, without even a break in the reading of names. You read your last name and started walking away; the new reader was reading a name before you even got off the stage. The list was updated through the day of the memorial and we got a fax from the Defense Department that afternoon with the final (as of that time) couple hundred names on it. I remember part of the fax was blurred and I called the phone number given in Washington, DC to get a couple names clarified. The phone was answered by a woman saying 'Vietnam Death Registry' ... she clarified what was blurred on our copy, and I don't know to this day why I did it, but instead of thanking her for her help, I screamed at her in the phone and said 'how can you stay there doing the evil work you are doing as part of the government?' It just seemed so natural to her. There was a long pause, and she said, 'sir, you are about the hundredth person on the phone today to curse, revile or abuse me. I am sorry; it is not my war either. For God's sake let hope it ends soon, somehow, some way.' Vietnam wrecked America. Now, Yugoslavia. And when our ground troops go in, as will happen eventually, I suspect the Russians will decide to join the fray. Thank you for reading this. I just had to say it. When the protests begin, I'll be one of the first to join. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #47 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 14 01:16:23 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA10406; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 01:16:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 01:16:23 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199904140516.BAA10406@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #48 TELECOM Digest Wed, 14 Apr 99 01:16:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 48 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Erlang's Forumla in the Digital Age (The Old Bear) Telecom Update (Canada) #178, April 12, 1999 (Angus TeleManagement) Book Review: "Optical Communications Networks", Mukherjee (Rob Slade) Who or What is Bell America? (Greg Stahl) Yahoo Asked to Reveal User Names, Again (Monty Solomon) Yahoo Privacy Holes Signal Need For Standards (Monty Solomon) TelephonyWorld Updates (CreDesCon) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications 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, 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 00:00:00 GMT From: The Old Bear Subject: Erlang's Forumla in the Digital Age INNOVATION Old rule doesn't apply in new age: Experts find Erlang phone formula fails to explain digital traffic jams by Lee Dye LA Time Syndicate Armed with little more than a stopwatch and a good understanding of statistics, A. K. Erlang went to a small village shortly after the turn of the century and began timing phone calls on the local switchboard. His goal was to figure out which percentage of callers had to wait for an available line. Out of that simple project came the basis for something called queuing theory and a formula that is still used to help communications companies design their systems to meet the needs of everything from small communities to global networks. While it still works for voice calls, Erlang's formula began to crumble with the advent of the fax machine and data communications, including the Internet. Much to their astonishment, scientists have learned that Erlang's simple formula -- based on the assumption that there is an average length for phone calls and a mean traffic rate -- isn't going to work for anything but voice communications. Instead of the low rumble of the telephone, scientists grappling with Internet traffic have found themselves faced with a Gatling gun. "Erlang's formula started to break down when computers started talking to computers," said Robert Calderbank, a vice president for research at AT&T Labs in Florham Park, N.J. "When fax machines and computers started using the network instead of just people, the statistics of traffic started to change." Calderbank heads an AT&T research project set up to study how digital traffic flows through the Internet and what role users play in that process. Until they understand that, they don't have a prayer of designing systems that will meet the needs of the 21st century. The first discovery was a whopper. Traffic on the World Wide Web comes in bursts, rather than in steady flows, and the same patterns of bursts are repeated regardless of whether the time interval studied is a few seconds long or a millionth of a second. "It's a true fractal," said Walter Willinger, a member of Calderbank's team. By that he means patterns that repeat themselves, regardless of the time interval. Such "self-similar" patterns have been found throughout nature, giving rise to a new field of mathematics called fractals. "With fractals you look at a coastline and it looks wiggly, and then you look at a smaller piece of the coastline and it still looks wiggly, and then you look at an even smaller segment, and it's still wiggly," Calderbank said. "It looks the same at all distance scales." Similarly, the same "bursty" patterns of Web traffic appear over and over again, regardless of whether the time studied is a millisecond or a second. That "bursty" pattern is one of the chief reasons networks experience those irritating delays familiar to all Web users, Willinger said. "The network can be filled up in short periods of time during which the user will get very bad performance," Willinger said. "If you try to go to a Web server and download a document, you might have to wait a couple of seconds or even longer just to get connected. One of the links along the Web server can be so congested for a small period of time that when you try to use it you don't get any response." Those delays will surely increase as traffic on the Internet continues to grow. "Once you understand" the bursting effect "you can start dealing with questions like, 'How can I control it, how can I manage it, what can I do with it?'" Willinger said. But why would digital traffic be that different from voice communications, especially in today's global networks? Why don't the peaks and valleys offset each other, since peak demands in Los Angeles are at different times than in London, for example? The answer, Calderbank said, lies in how we use the Net. In voice communications, we make short phone calls and long phone calls, and they tend to average out. But differences in the amount of data we ship over the Internet are far more extreme, ranging from very short, such as email, to "incredibly long," such as sending a portfolio of high-resolution images, Calderbank said. Anna Gilbert has been using "a kind of microscope to study the level of traffic on AT&T's network over the last six years. "It allows you to zoom in on particular times," she said. Through a technique called "wavelet decomposition," Gilbert can break down the packets of digital information at any point in time. It was by plotting that information that scientists discovered the fractal nature of Internet traffic. Network designers want to know precisely what is causing the bursting so they can build better systems for the future. And for that, the researchers are concentrating on analyzing very short periods of time, down to fractions of a millionth of a second It's a tattle like analyzing earthquakes in Southern California," Calderbank said. "Something very interesting happened in a very short period of time, and it's important to understand exactly what happened in that very small amount of time." ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 10:59:09 -0400 From: Angus TeleManagement Subject: Telecom Update (Canada) #178, April 12, 1999 ************************************************************ * * * TELECOM UPDATE * * Angus TeleManagement's Weekly Telecom Newsbulletin * * http://www.angustel.ca * * Number 178: April 12, 1999 * * * * Publication of Telecom Update is made possible by * * generous financial support from: * * * * AT&T Canada ............... http://www.attcanada.com/ * * Bell Canada ............... http://www.bell.ca/ * * Lucent Technologies ....... http://www.lucent.ca/ * * MetroNet Communications ... http://www.metronet.ca/ * * Sprint Canada ............. http://www.sprintcanada.ca/ * * Telus Communications....... http://www.telus.com/ * * TigerTel Services ......... http://www.citydial.com/ * * * ************************************************************ IN THIS ISSUE: ** Bell Operators and Technicians Strike ** Payphone Boom Ahead? ** Petty Dampens Acquisition Talk ** Bell, Shaw Lose Metrus Case ** BCT.Telus Cuts Overseas Rates ** CRTC Restricts Cable Winbacks ** NBTel and Royal Bank Test Mondex ** Nortel, Bell Atlantic in Billion Dollar Deal ** Ameritech Names Bell CFO ** Architel Loses Contract, Buyout in Doubt ** Cisco Announces Unified Communications ** BCE Emergis Gets BCE E-Commerce Deal ** Music Giants Plan Online Store ** Cogeco Buys Cableworks ** MetroNet Launches Service in London ** ITU Sets 3G Framework ** CrossKeys Recruits McClaren ** Alleged Melissa Author Arrested ** Highpoint Completes NAG Purchase ** Lucent Buys Mosaix ** Cannect Correction ** Are Your Cellphones out of Control? BELL OPERATORS AND TECHNICIANS STRIKE: At midnight on April 8, 9,500 Bell Canada operators and technicians went on strike. The members of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers union (CEP) voted 73% to reject Bell's latest contract offer. The major issue is job security. ** The United Steelworkers union has guaranteed a $20 Million loan to the CEP for its strike fund. PAYPHONE BOOM AHEAD? There's not much action yet, but there is definitely a lot of interest. By the end of March, the CRTC had approved the registrations of 33 Competitive Pay Telephone Service Providers, and there were about a dozen more applications pending. PETTY DAMPENS ACQUISITION TALK: Responding to speculation that BCT.Telus might buy Clearnet or Call-Net, BCT.Telus CEO George Petty told reporters last week that there will not be "a bombshell" announcement at the company's annual meeting in May. ** Petty said the company would reveal its new name and some details about its strategy at the meeting. BELL, SHAW LOSE METRUS CASE: Developer Metrus Properties does not have to allow Bell Canada and Shaw Communications access to common utility trenches in a new subdivision north of Toronto. In a letter dated April 8, the CRTC rejects an appeal by the telco and cableco against a deal which gives exclusive access to Metrus affiliate, Futureway Communications. (See Telecom Update #169) The Commission says it will provide detailed reasons for the decision at a later date. BCT.TELUS CUTS OVERSEAS RATES: BCT.Telus has cut overseas rates on two discount plans. In BC, users of the business and residential "Flat World" plan will pay up to 24% less to call 20 countries. In Alberta, residential users of the "Your Way Straight Plan" will pay up to 31% less for calls to 26 countries. CRTC RESTRICTS CABLE WINBACKS: The CRTC has ruled that cable TV companies must wait at least 90 days before attempting to market their services to customers who switch to satellite TV or wireless cable companies. NBTEL AND ROYAL BANK TEST MONDEX: NBTel is partnering with Royal Bank in a smart card pilot project which uses Mondex e-cash for online purchases. Royal Bank customers who are users of NBTel's Vibe service will receive a Mondex card and a smart card reader which attaches to a PC. NORTEL, BELL ATLANTIC IN BILLION DOLLAR DEAL: Nortel Networks will provide half of Bell Atlantic's next generation digital loop carrier equipment. That contract, and another for DMS switching equipment, will be worth up to US$1 Billion over the next five years. AMERITECH NAMES BELL CFO: Ronald Reising, currently Chief Financial Officer of an Ameritech venture in Hungary, will become Bell Canada's CFO when Ameritech's investment in Bell is finalized. Bill Anderson, presently CFO for Bell and BCE, continues in that post for BCE. (See Telecom Update #175b) ARCHITEL LOSES CONTRACT, BUYOUT IN DOUBT: Architel Systems has lost its largest contract, with Colorado-based IICG Communications. Architel's stock price fell by 48%, leading analysts to speculate that Amdocs may withdraw its offer to purchase the Toronto-area developer of software for telecom companies. CISCO ANNOUNCES UNIFIED COMMUNICATIONS: Cisco Systems has announced a "Unified Communications Strategy" which, it says, will enable service providers to offer their customers "consolidated voice, fax, and e-mail services on a single IP network, independent of location, time, or device." BCE EMERGIS GETS BCE E-COMMERCE DEAL: BCE Emergis has signed a three-year contract to host and manage BCE's Certificate Authority, which enables secure economic transactions on the Internet. MUSIC GIANTS PLAN ONLINE STORE: The world's largest music label, Universal Music, is joining forces with third-ranked BMG to launch GetMusic.Com, an online CD retailer. The companies say they will not offer downloadable music until industry standards are set. COGECO BUYS CABLEWORKS: Montreal-based Cogeco Cable has purchased Cableworks Communications, an independent cableco which has 64,000 customers in Hamilton, Ontario, and surrounding communities, for $162.5 Million. METRONET LAUNCHES SERVICE IN LONDON: MetroNet Communications has begun offering voice, data, and Internet services to business and government customers in London, Ontario. The company has a Nortel DMS-500 switch in place and says it will deploy 250 route kilometers of fiber optic cable in the city this year. ITU SETS 3G FRAMEWORK: The International Telecommunications Union has agreed on the major features and design parameters for broadband third generation (3G) mobile communication systems. Detailed specifications are to be developed by November. CROSSKEYS RECRUITS MCCLAREN: On May 1, EDS will complete its acquisition of SHL Systemhouse from MCI WorldCom. Ian McClaren, Systemhouse's President for Canada, UK, and International, will leave the company to become President and CEO of CrossKeys Systems, a Newbridge affiliate. ALLEGED MELISSA AUTHOR ARRESTED: New Jersey authorities have arrested a man they say was the author and distributor of the Melissa virus. Thirty-year-old David L. Smith has been charged with various offenses which together carry a maximum penalty of 40 years in prison and $480,000 in fines. HIGHPOINT COMPLETES NAG PURCHASE: Vancouver-based Highpoint Telecommunications has completed its acquisition of 50% of Toronto-based overseas carrier North American Gateway, for US$6.5 Million in cash and 3 million Highpoint shares. Global Light Telecommunications owns a controlling interest in Highpoint. (See Telecom Update #158) LUCENT BUYS MOSAIX: Lucent Technologies has agreed to buy Mosaix, a developer of call center and relationship management software, for US$145 Million in Lucent shares. CANNECT CORRECTION: After last week's Telecom Update was distributed, Cannect Communications issued a revised news release stating that Dean Pacey's actual title is Vice- President Marketing and Strategic Planning. ARE YOUR CELLPHONES OUT OF CONTROL? In the April issue of Telemanagement, John Riddell examines the problems corporations face in managing the proliferation of wireless phones from multiple carriers, under many different contracts. ** Also in Telemanagement #164: "Nortel and Hewlett-Packard Launch PBX-in-a-PC" and Telemanagement's 1999 Area Code Finder. ** To subscribe to Telemanagement call 1-800-263-4415, ext 225 or visit http://www.angustel.ca/teleman/tm.html ============================================================ HOW TO SUBMIT ITEMS FOR TELECOM UPDATE E-MAIL: editors@angustel.ca FAX: 905-686-2655 MAIL: TELECOM UPDATE Angus TeleManagement Group 8 Old Kingston Road Ajax, Ontario Canada L1T 2Z7 =========================================================== 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 on the first business day of the week at http://www.angustel.ca/update/up.html 2. The e-mail edition is distributed free of charge. To subscribe, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should contain only the two words: subscribe update To stop receiving the e-mail edition, send an e-mail message to majordomo@angustel.ca. The text of the message should say only: unsubscribe update [Your e-mail address] =========================================================== COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER: All contents copyright 1999 Angus TeleManagement Group Inc. All rights reserved. For further information, including permission to reprint or reproduce, please e-mail rosita@angustel.ca or phone 905-686-5050 ext 225. 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: Rob Slade Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 08:31:20 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Optical Communications Networks", Biswanath Mukherjee Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca BKOPCMNT.RVW 990225 "Optical Communications Networks", Biswanath Mukherjee, 1997, 0-07-044435-8, U$60.00 %A Biswanath Mukherjee mukherje@cs.ucdavis.edu %C 300 Water Street, Whitby, Ontario L1N 9B6 %D 1997 %G 0-07-044435-8 %I McGraw-Hill Ryerson/Osborne %O U$60.00 905-430-5000 800-565-5758 fax: 905-430-5020 %P 576 p. %T "Optical Communications Networks" The book is intended as a text for a graduate level course in the networking and protocol aspects of a fibre optic based network above the physical layer. In particular, in deals with wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) architectures. While pedagogical styles, such as end of chapter exercises, are present, the author also sees the work as forming a reference for industry professionals. Part one examines the foundational technologies. Chapter one presents optical networking, and specifically WDM optical networking, as the answer to pretty much all current networking problems, based on its enormous bandwidth capabilities. However, this section also demonstrates the differing requirements of students and professionals. Where students will be able to accept statements made about technical needs for WDM networking, communications workers will be rather horrified at the cavalier dismissal of practical problems. On the other hand, the tutorial value of the exercises will not delight any classes. Many of the questions are childishly simplistic, while others rely on material that is not supplied in the text. The material on physical media, sources (lasers), and components is demanding, and would require significant background in optics. Part two looks at local optical networks in a very mathematics intensive, and quite academic manner. Chapter three reviews options for a single hop network structure and four details the Rainbow example while five discusses multihop architectures as six examines the GEMNET system. All of this text moves very quickly through basic concepts. Channel sharing and multicasting is talked about in chapter seven. In starting to look at wide area networking, in part three, chapter eight considers elements of topological design. Again, many points are passed over quite tersely. A formal method is used to obtain an optimal solution to a topological problem in chapter nine, but it specifically ignores wavelength continuity constraints. Similar shortcuts are taken in routing and minimizing frequencies used in chapter ten. Chapter eleven discusses wavelength conversion, while chapter twelve finishes up with other wavelength routing topics. Part four is a grab bag of topics. Chapter thirteen examines multiwavelength ring networks. "Feedback" loop elimination is discussed in chapter fourteen. Amplifiers may be necessary in certain optical networks, and optimising their placement is discussed in chapter fifteen. Finally, chapter sixteen looks at the other two contenders in optical networking technology, time (TDM) and code (CDM) division multiplexing. I am willing to grant that, in the hands of a knowledgeable instructor, and with proper prerequisite background, this text would be suitable for the course described. Professionals, however, will find the content abrupt and possibly impractical. In a sparsely populated field any work is valuable, but it could certainly be improved. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1999 BKOPCMNT.RVW 990225 ====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com 90% of all infections are Stoned. - the viral corollary to Sturgeon's Law http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 22:07:09 -0400 From: Greg Stahl Subject: Who or What is Bell America? Hello All, Recently, radio ads for "Bell America" started playing up here in northern NY. They are advertising Local and LD service. Has anyone heard of them? Thanks, Greg gsta@music.stlawu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 01:04:54 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Yahoo Asked to Reveal User Names, Again By Beth Lipton Staff Writer, CNET News.com April 12, 1999, 5 a.m. PT Yahoo once again is being asked to reveal the names of people who posted items to its message boards, according to reports. Restaurant chain Shoney's wants Yahoo to reveal the names of people who posted confidential information about it on the message boards, using the names of some of the firm's executives, including its president and chairman, the Associated Press reported. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,34932,00.html ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Yahoo Privacy Holes Signal Need for Standards Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:16:28 -0400 By Troy Wolverton Staff Writer, CNET News.com April 13, 1999, 8:50 a.m. PT When Yahoo acknowledged last week that a demonstration on Yahoo Store was revealing customer order information, it was only the latest major site among several to face a privacy breach. Just over the last few weeks, the likes of Intel, Microsoft, Yahoo, Excite, and Macromedia have faced problems in protecting users' personal data. Though the breaches varied in seriousness and reach, the sheer number of them underscores what Hong Kong's privacy chief and other international officials said last week at the Computers, Freedom & Privacy conference in Washington: Although the United States dominates in Net innovation, usage, and investment, its data protection policies are lacking and are beginning to trail those of the rest of the world. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,35027,00.html [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know what is going on with Yahoo lately, but they seem to really be slipping up in a lot of ways. Some of their software is just perfectly buggy, and a letter to their suggested addresses just gets back a form answer saying they will look at it. Nothing ever really gets fixed. As one example, consider the previously nice product they offered called the Yahoo Ticker. If you have a Yahoo personal front page (what they call MyYahoo) the news ticker software would read the headlines on each story as well as the weather for the place you selected, and then scroll it across your desktop whether you were on line with them or not. It was a great product, free of any advertising, etc. A small Yahoo icon at the end of the ribbon allowed you to click to get mail. A click on any headline on the ticker got you the associated story. Then one day it got broken. It would work only on the condition that the user *never* made any modifications on his MyYahoo page as to layout, type of content, etc. If you made those changes, the ticker suddenly went out of synch. Ditto their companion service called the javaticker. You brought up a certain web page at any size desired on your screen and at any location, their news ticker would play off your MyYahoo headlines, weather, etc. It was great! Now the javaticker just displays endlessly the message, 'unable to parse content' and the desktop ticker just endlessly displays either the word 'weather:' over and over again or the message, 'click here to configure ticker', but needless to say, clicking does nothing. Three or four emails to Yahoo customer support went unanswered. I then called them on the phone at their office in Santa Clara, CA at the number 408-731-3300 and got tossed into someone's voicemail who did not call back. When I called the next day, I spoke to a person named Matt on the direct number 408-530-5167 who said he was responsible for the ticker product, and that it was 'the server on our end' which was sending out the sour data. He assured me it would probably be fixed 'in a few days'. Now two weeks later, the ticker is still broken. I am not really surprised that they have bugs all over the place there. Time and again you get stuck in a loop when reading and erasing email, then trying to exit back to MyYahoo. Ditto when you use the facility for changing and/or rearranging your personal MyYahoo page. Email gets answered saying 'we will look into it' if it gets answered at all. Maybe this latest fiasco will cause some changes to be made. Should I just dump all their software off my machine totally and be done with them? I dunno, free email accounts, web pages, chat rooms and newsfeeds to AP/Reuters are pretty scarce on the net these days aren't they? Maybe I better suck up to them, and stay on their good side at Yahoo, if I want to be able to keep my barely used email account with them. If someone at Yahoo is reading this, *please* fix the ticker server and the problems with MyYahoo home pages. After you fix the bugs with your merchants and credit cards of course; I can certainly understand your priorities. But Yahoo should understand there are plenty of services which have front pages with news available and willing to take any Yahoo user who wants to migrate to them. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 13 Apr 1999 22:01:19 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: credescon@aol.com (CreDesCon) Subject: TelephonyWorld Updates Hi, It's been a while since I've had the chance to let you know what's been happening at TelephonyWorld. If you haven't visited lately, we've made some changes, added new features, and will be adding more in the near future. Check them out at http://www.telephonyworld.com If you don't have a full page company profile on TelephonyWorld, now is an excellent time to get on board. With your new listing you'll receive 10,000 free banner advertisements. visit http://www.telephonyworld.com/submit/listing.htm for more details. Last month we celebrated our one year anniversary. The site has really grown, and currently receives 15,000 unique visitors monthly and almost 1 million monthly hits. Thanks for your support in this accomplishment. --- NEW FEATURES --- - We now have a forum where you can interact with other visitors and share ideas. - We've launched the "Bargain Spot", a place for our listing vendors to offer special deals and promotions. - We'll be opening up 3 new solution sections mid April - "Broadband & Wireless","Network Access" and "Phones & Gear". If your products fit these new categories, you'll want to be there. - We're going to be publishing a hard-copy TW Newsletter. This is very exciting and you can be sure that you will have great opportunities to get your news and articles published in this monthly executive briefing. - We're starting a section dedicated to on-line marketing where you can get great tips on leveraging the power of the Internet beyond TelephonyWorld. Finally, we really want to know how we can improve the site and services we've been providing. Please take a minute to tell us what you think, by filling out our quality survey at http://www.telephonyworld.com/marketng/survrslt.htm That's all for now. Feel free to contact me at any time. Best Regards, Don Panek TelephonyWorld.com "Bringing the world of telephony to your fingertips." http://www.telephonyworld.com contact us 732-432-0375 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #48 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 14 03:47:18 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id DAA15145; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 03:47:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 03:47:18 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199904140747.DAA15145@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #49 TELECOM Digest Wed, 14 Apr 99 03:47:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 49 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson New Scientist Special Investigation: Mobile Phones (Mike Pollock) Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Mike Pollock) Position Available, Santa Clara, CA S/W Engineer (Tom Whiting) How to Test Harmonic Distortion? (2002jgy) How to Test "Return Loss" (2002jgy) Telephone Pairs and Lines (Norman L. Kleinberg) Wanted: Telecom Instructors (Fred) 5ESS Y2K Compliance Testing (sveinsson@my-dejanews.com) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications 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, 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Pollock Subject: New Scientist Special Investigation: Mobile Phones Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:50:38 -0400 GET YOUR HEAD ROUND THIS... By David Concar Forget the hype--there's still no evidence that mobile phones will mangle your memories or give you cancer. But the microwaves they emit must be up to something. Meet the fast-growing worms and boozing rats that have the experts baffled...and discover why a phone call might make you quick on the draw. FOR ANYONE WHO USES a mobile, these are worrying times. "Mobile phone killed my man," screamed one headline last year. In February came claims that an unpublished study had found that cellphones cause memory loss. And last month, a British tabloid devoted its front page to a picture supposedly showing how mobiles heat the brain. But speak to the scientists whose work is the focus of these scares and you hear a different story. First, there is no evidence that mobiles cause cancer or any other illness in people. You can also forget about mobiles "cooking" your brain--a mild bout of exercise will heat your head more than the puny microwaves that the devices emit. And finally, the study fuelling the latest claims about mobile phones scrambling the mind in fact shows nothing of the kind. What we do have, however, are some tantalising results suggesting that cellphones' emissions have a variety of strange effects on living tissue that can't be reconciled with conventional radiation biology. And it's only when the questions raised by these experiments are answered that we'll be able to say for sure what mobiles might be doing to your head. One of the weirdest effects comes from the now famous "memory loss" study, published this week in the International Journal of Radiation Biology (vol 75, p 447). Alan Preece and his colleagues at the University of Bristol clamped a device that mimicked the microwave emissions of analogue or digital mobile phones to the left ear of volunteers. Contrary to the press reports that appeared in February, the volunteers were as good at recalling words and pictures they had been shown on a computer screen whether or not the device was switched on. Preece says he still can't comment on the effects of using a cellphone for years on end. But he rules out the suggestion that mobiles have an immediate effect on our cognitive abilities. "I'm pretty sure there is no effect on short-term memory," he says. But the microwaves did have one completely unexpected effect: they decreased the time subjects took to react to words flashed onto the screen. When "yes" or "no" was displayed, the volunteers were quicker at pressing a matching button if the headset was switched on. The improvement was small--about 4 per cent when the device was set to mimic an analogue phone--but unlikely to be a freak finding, because it was seen in two groups of volunteers. This seems like good news. But if microwave emissions can influence reaction times as they pass through the skull, what else might they be doing? It's a good question, because in theory mobile phone emissions shouldn't do anything to living tissues (see "Explaining the inexplicable", p 23). Preece speculates that the improvement in reaction times is caused by microwaves somehow speeding the flow of electrical signals through an area of the cerebral cortex known as the angular gyrus, which connects brain areas involved in vision and language. But he has no idea why this should happen. This finding joins a growing list of unexpected effects ascribed to mobile phone emissions. Some of the most intriguing results come from David de Pomerai and his team at the University of Nottingham. They have been beaming microwaves at tiny nematode worms, chosen because their developmental and cell biology are well understood. In one series of experiments, the team found that larvae exposed to an overnight dose of microwaves wriggled less and grew 5 per cent faster than larvae that were not exposed, suggesting that the microwaves were speeding up cell division. The researchers now intend to examine mammalian cells to see if they divide more rapidly when exposed to microwaves--a finding that would raise fears about cancer. But de Pomerai insists that there is no reason to panic about the nematode data. "As a proportion of life span, exposing a nematode worm to microwaves overnight is like exposing a human continuously for an entire decade," he says. De Pomerai is also trying to work out how microwaves could affect nematode biology. He already has evidence that "heat shock" proteins are produced in the exposed worms' cells. Despite their name, heat shock proteins are produced by cells in response to many kinds of stress that damage proteins, not just excessive heat. The heat generated by the microwaves in de Pomerai's experiments was too low to stimulate their production, so he believes microwaves do something else that induces stress. Support for the idea that microwaves can trigger biochemical stress at low energies comes from a team led by Henry Lai at the University of Washington in Seattle. He claims that rats exposed to microwaves produce natural painkillers called endorphins and are more likely to binge on alcohol or react strongly to morphine and barbiturates. His team also has evidence from rats that exposure to microwaves unleashes corticotropin releasing factor, a stress hormone, and disrupts the ebb and flow in the brain of acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter involved in memory and alertness, among other things. According to Lai, the changes are similar to those in rats exposed to stressful blasts of white noise and help to explain why rats exposed to microwaves take longer to learn the position of a submerged platform in cloudy water--another of his findings. Well known for his outspoken views about the hazards of mobile phones, Lai concedes that he has no evidence to suggest people have problems handling alcohol or remembering where they are following a phone call. Yet he argues that mobiles should sometimes be switched off as a precaution--by aircraft technicians performing safety-critical maintenance work, for instance. Last year, fears about mobiles affecting brain function received fresh impetus thanks to work by John Tattersall and his colleagues at the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency's labs at Porton Down in Wiltshire. Tattersall exposed slices of rat brain to microwave radiation. He found that it blunted their electrical activity and weakened their responses to stimulation. Because the brain slices were taken from the hippocampus, a structure with a role in learning, the results were seized upon as further evidence that mobile phones could scramble human memories. Mixed messages In fact, the implications are far from clear. In people, the hippocampus is buried too deep in the brain to be influenced by emissions from mobile phones, says Tattersall. And his latest findings have undermined fears about memory loss. One result, for instance, suggests that nerve cell synapses exposed to microwaves become more--rather than less--receptive to undergoing changes linked to memory formation. Taken together, the available data are very difficult to interpret. And some scientists suspect they may not even be reproducible. John Moulder, a radiation oncologist at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, says these experiments tend to work in one lab but fail in others, suggesting that technical glitches could be responsible for the results. Perhaps the best reason for remaining sceptical is that the most worrying discovery ever made about low-energy microwaves remains mired in controversy four years after it was reported. In 1995, Lai claimed the DNA from the brains of rats exposed to microwaves suffered numerous strand breaks, a type of damage often seen in cells exposed to cancer- causing chemicals or powerful X-rays. "If it was right, it would completely change the way we think about radiation," says Joseph Roti Roti, a radiation oncologist at Washington University in St Louis, Missouri. But so far, Roti Roti's team--funded by the mobile phone giant Motorola--has been unable to repeat the finding. Neither has Luc Verschaeve at the Flemish Institute for Technological Research in Boeretang, who has exposed white blood cells to microwaves. In 1997 came another bombshell that is now being called into question. Researchers at the Royal Adelaide Hospital in Australia spent 18 months exposing mice to radiation mimicking the emissions of digital mobile phones. Michael Repacholi, who coordinated the study, didn't expect to find anything untoward. Yet twice as many of these mice developed lymphomas as did animals not exposed to the radiation. Cancer conundrum But since then, three other teams have failed to find similar evidence of increased cancer rates among mice exposed to microwave emissions. To increase the sensitivity of the experiment, Repacholi's team used mice that had been genetically engineered to be susceptible to lymphoma. In the latest study, a team of microwave experts at the Brooks Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas, used mice genetically engineered to be susceptible to breast tumours. They exposed the animals to microwaves for 20 hours a day for 18 months, yet saw no increases in tumour rates. Repacholi, who is now coordinating the WHO's research into the health effects of electromagnetic radiation, says he is reserving judgment about the cancer link until researchers in Australia have repeated the original experiment using the same strain of mice and exposure conditions. "If they don't come up with the same result, that'll be a happy outcome," he says. An even happier outcome would be if microwaves turned out to be good for you. It sounds crazy, but a couple of years ago a team led by William Ross Adey at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Loma Linda, California, found that mice exposed to microwaves for two hours a day were less likely to develop brain tumours when given a cancer-causing chemical. But nobody has yet replicated that finding either, and Moulder doubts anyone will. He believes that what we're seeing is the variation from lab to lab that you would expect from technically demanding experiments that are trying to pick up tiny effects. "Study something enough times and by the laws of statistics you'll occasionally see something," he says. Some of the experiments may also be plagued by systematic errors. One problem is that microwave emissions can interfere with electrodes and other instruments, leading to all manner of false readings. Another is that researchers often have a hard job ensuring their equipment doesn't induce heating effects that could never be caused by a mobile phone. So should we forget about mobile phone radiation causing brain tumours and scrambling our minds? "If it doesn't reliably cause cancer in animals and cells at high doses, then it probably isn't going to cause cancer in humans," says Moulder. And while the results on the activity of the brain are too new to have been subjected to the same scrutiny, the consensus is: don't panic . . . but watch this space. from New Scientist, 10 April 1999 ------------------------------ From: Mike Pollock Subject: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:50:32 -0400 Reuters LOS ANGELES -- MCI Worldcom is facing a civil lawsuit alleging it discriminates against minorities by blocking international calling card calls made from inner-city neighborhoods. Darren Haylock, in a lawsuit filed Tuesday, said he used his calling card to phone relatives in Belize from predominantly white areas of Los Angeles. But his calls were blocked when he tried to use the card from his mother's home in predominantly black south central Los Angeles, his suit said. MCI issued a statement Wednesday saying, "This lawsuit is completely without merit." Spokesman Les Kumagai declined to comment on an allegation in the suit that MCI blocked calls in areas where it believed calling card fraud was prevalent. Haylock, 35, a Belize native, alleged in the suit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court that MCI caused him emotional distress because he was trying to make arrangements to return to his Caribbean homeland to attend an aunt's funeral. The suit claimed the practice was prevalent in "other areas where minorities are concentrated" and accused MCI of discrimination and false advertising. Haylock, a financial adviser who is married with two children, was seeking punitive damages and "disgorgements of all sums wrongfully obtained by defendants." Haylock's attorney, Paul Kiesel, said he believed the suit was the first of its kind in the United States. Kiesel said the lawsuit was filed not only on behalf of Haylock but all others who had been discriminated against because of the areas from which they called. "This is essentially 'redlining' in the telecommunications industry," Kiesel said, referring to insurance companies that increase their rates in areas of high crime or banks that refuse to grant mortgages in those areas. "What we know is that MCI has blocked calls in so-called high fraud zones. We have been able to identify one such area [south central Los Angeles], and we believe many others exist," Kiesel said. "There was nothing wrong with my client's calling card. It was the community he was dialing from. This is a blatantly discriminatory practice," he added. The lawsuit claimed that Haylock was able to call Belize from his home in the northern Los Angeles suburb of Lancaster and from pay phones in suburban Sherman Oaks, Moreno Valley, and West Covina. But when he tried to use the card from his mother's house in south central Los Angeles, an MCI operator told him the call would "not be allowed" because it was being made from an area where there was a "high level of fraud." A customer service representative told Haylock his card was OK but that international calls were blocked from certain "MCI computer-selected localities," the suit said. Haylock claimed a supervisor confirmed that high-fraud areas were blocked out but refused to name any other areas apart from south central Los Angeles. In his lawsuit, Haylock said he was not informed of the restrictions when he became an MCI customer in 1992. Calling cards are imprinted with the customer's telephone number plus a four-digit personal identification number. Police say calling card fraud usually involves stolen cards, the numbers of which are then circulated and used by several people to make calls abroad and to 1-900 telephone sex services. Typically, police say, thousands of dollars can be run up on one stolen card, which the issuing phone company has to absorb. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well as usual, let's have a little bit of disinformation from a stupid newspaper reporter tossed into the mix here. 1-900 can *never* be billed to a telco card. 1-900 can *never* be placed from a public phone, coin, calling card not withstanding. 1-900 can *only* be dialed via a private telephone on which 900 has not been blocked. On private phones, telco has recourse. Does anyone in the print media understand this simple concept? Now let's get on with Mr. Haylock's problem. AT&T has been illegally redlining inner city neighborhoods for years. The only difference is, they teach their operators and supervisors to *lie about it* and make up some other excuse instead. For instance, try calling Israel or Belize or any number of countries using an AT&T calling card from a payphone in, let's say, Winnetka, IL. Of course no one does, because people from third world countries do not live in Winnetka, IL. They may come there to work as maids for the people who do live there, but they don't personally live there. None the less, try it. Your call will go through promptly billed to your AT&T calling card. Now go a few miles south to the Chicago border line and presto, that AT&T card won't work any longer for the same calls. Now do not mistake some country in the middle east with the UK or Australia or New Zealand for example. If it is a nice, clean, mostly white-people country where they are civilized and can speak in a language that telephone company toll fraud investigators can under- stand when they are investigating a a chargeback three or six months later, all is well. Otherwise, *forget it* if you live in an inner- city area along with other uncivilized, mostly-not-white people who speak a language you do not understand. AT&T's approach is rather brilliant though, and works quite well con- sidering how little most people know about telco's inner workings. AT&T assumes most people will not argue with them -- after all, they are the telephone company -- and for those few who do want to argue, one of these excuses is given out: 1) The computer which processes AT&T calling cards is down right now. We do not know when it will be back in service. Why, it might be days. 2) The computer which processes VISA/MC cards is down right now. We do not know when it will be back in service. It might be a couple weeks. 3) (This one said with an astounded, almost embarassed tone of voice): The country where you are calling does not accept the AT&T calling card as a method of payment. This last one almost caused me to go spastic once when speaking with an AT&T operator. I asked her if she knew what the term 'sent paid' meant, and why would the distant telco admin have any say-so at all in how AT&T billed its customers? At that point, her elbow accidentally hit the release key and dumped me. But normally, the above three lies usually serve AT&T quite well. Most people just say, 'oh, alright' and hang up. If you call back or stay on the line and really start raising a stink worse than a Pittsburgh steel mill, you will be connected to a supervisor at the Pittsburgh IOC who will buffer the call. That's so that the operator who took your call originally can get back to work and not have her traffic statistics for the current hour messed up on account of staying on the line with you for twenty minutes. You can escalate it all you want, and at some point you will receive an apology for your inconvenience and in the mail a few days later a couple of the one dollar pre-printed checks they send out marked 'Pay to the Order of the Telephone Company' which you send in with your local phone bill. Further up the line, you will get the excuse that 'many of the operators were not trained correctly' but if you try to make the same call a week later, a month later or a year later, they still have not been trained. I suggest they have been trained quite well ... after all, they are not getting sued for it like MCI. So MCI, your problem is you need to train your people to lie, and be evasive, like Sprint and AT&T do so well. If you do not make claims, you cannot get sued for claims you did not make can you? I understand quite well that toll fraud is a problem -- a mighty serious one in fact -- but you do not redline entire neighborhoods to avoid it. Diners Club and Amex both got sued for the same thing years ago; tossing credit applications from certain zip codes in the wastebasket without processing them. Why can't telco calling card at time of issuance be issued in one of two ways: do you or do you not anticipate making international calls? If you do not, the card will be noted that way. If you do, then provide us with one additional piece of identification which will show up on the operator's console, ie mother's maiden name or last four digits of social security number. This will never be on your card; you MUST keep it secret. In either event, if your card is lost, stolen or misplaced you MUST call us immediatly at so that the card will be immediatly locked out. Well, that would involve 'changing the system', something AT&T resisted for years with the older, really simple-minded system they used until the 1970's. Anyone remember the 083-312-493-3714J system in the past? The first three digits were the RAO (regional accounting office code), then the phone number and the so-called 'key letter' which would be tied to the fourth or fifth digit of the phone number and change each year. Every year on January 1 when the new cards went into service, all the phreaks in a town would sit down around a table, and after solemnly promising that they would not abuse a calling card of someone in the room, all present would lay their personal calling card out on the table, and by logic and deduction and examination of the cards, the key-letter for the new year would be deduced. After AT&T got eaten alive one year with toll fraud to the tune of about seven million dollars just from the territory of New York Telephone Company alone, they decided it was time to change the whole concept. Maybe its time for the telcos to change again and realize that a large percentage of Americans do not hail from the UK, Australia or Switzer- land or even Kansas for that matter. Large numbers come from countries where language and culture are totally different. They live in the inner cities because they have not been able to escape to Winnetka or Skokie, IL yet, but they are not dishonest people, and they have family emergencies in far away lands like many other folks. Maybe telco could hire people from those communities to serve as a represen- tative, a sort of goodwill ambassador to explain telco policies. Maybe an additional unprinted 'pin' or piece of personal information known only to the legitimate user. Maybe one or two operators in each center who spoke the native language of the inner-city user who could be called upon to take over a situation with a dispute and using the customer's own language explain the problem and help solve it for future calls. Nah, too expensive. If you can pay an operator six or seven dollars an hour, teach her to talk like a parrot and lie for you, why bother to go to the additional expense and trouble? Its a lot like the New York City Police Department. Why go to the trouble of trying to work with a community when you can arrest someone, shoot him or bash his head open, haul him off to jail, sodomize him when you get there, and then simply lie about it later? Its a lot easier and cheaper that way. At least until the day you get sued it is ... Good luck to Mr. Haylock with his litigation. If he accomplishes anything, that would be great. Teleco redlining is an odious practice that should have stopped years ago if it ever had a reason to be started at all. It won't stop though when people say, 'oh, okay' and walk away humbly from the pay phone and then gratefully accept a handful of 'pay to the order of the telephone company' checks a few days later when a letter comes in the mail apologizing for their inconvenience. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 14 Apr 1999 03:49:27 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: twhit57023@aol.com (Tom Whiting) Subject: Position Available, Santa Clara, CA S/W Engineer Real-Time Comms. Start-up slated to go public in 8-12 months; strong management team from major companies. Seeking talented engineers with good skills or ability to interface with key major accounts. Compensation includes Salary, Stock Options, and Full Benefits. RESPONSIBILITIES: 1. Provide dedicated major account support. 2. Post-sales support; provide answers to implementation-related questions or documentation. 3. Prepare, present product and application training material to customers. 4. Support customer's development, integration, test and acceptance project phases. 5. Develop diagnostic methodology and problem work-arounds. 6. Participate in engineering reviews; create and suggest diagnostic enhancements. 7. Participate in system integration and test activity. 8. Inter-work issues and customer-requested enhancements with sales and marketing. 9. Lite travel (10% U.S. & International) may be required. REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Minimum 3-8 years of real-time communications systems software development or integration experience with 1-3 in embedded software. 2. Direct development experience using the following: assembler, C, C++, pSOS or some other RTOS, TCP/IP, FR, ATM, digital transmission techniques DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Hands-on experience using programming scopes, analyzers and related equipment in a software-intensive development environment. 2. Switching communications techniques and systems knowledge. 3. B.S. in E.E., Computer Science or equivalent. Tom Whiting Enterprise Resource Group (voice) (415) 440-1290 2711 Pacific Avenue (fax) (415) 775-2908 San Francisco, CA 94115 (email) tom@eresourcegroup.com ------------------------------ From: 2002jgy Subject: How to Test Harmonic Distortion? Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1999 10:48:32 -0700 Organization: No Spam Please Dear Friends, Can you give a good and simple write up on Harmonic Distortion in terms of telecomm, such as telephone communications. Can you tell me what is a simple method of measuring this for a simple "amplifier" device? This amplifer is connector to the telephone head-set between the telephone and the ear-microphone pieces. Thank you very much for your help. Jack ------------------------------ From: 2002jgy Subject: How to Test "Return Loss"? Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1999 10:50:21 -0700 Organization: No Spam Please Dear Friends, Can you tell me what is a simple method to test "Return Loss" in a telecom circuit. For example in a telephone device with a amplifier connect to the telephone line, how would the engineers to measure the return loss? That is the same head set amplifier connecting to the telephone and the microphone + ear piece. Thank you for your help. Jack ------------------------------ From: Norman L. Kleinberg Subject: Telephone Pairs and Lines Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1999 10:47:40 -0400 Organization: Baruch College - CUNY Hi Group: I'm having a house built and the wiring options are driving me crazy. I've got the contractor home-running CAT-5 lines to a patch panel in the basement. For phones he's running CAT-3 4-pair, daisy-chained in each room but in separate runs, meeting in the garage where the TELCO can get to it. The CAT-5 and phone lines are sharing a wall outlet. . My question has to do with the number of different lines I can have in the house: am I limited to a total of 4 numbers (lines), or can the TELCO hook, at least in theory, different numbers to each line? For example, suppose I have three rooms, so that there are three separate 4-pair lines in the garage. Can the TELCO hook 4X3 = 12 separate numbers (4 to each line), or am I limited to 4 different numbers total? Not that I'd ever want that many different lines, but we might want, say, 5 or 6, and I don't want to limit myself. I really have tried to search the web for an answer to this simple technical question, to no avail. If anyone can point me to the answer, or wishes to offer direct advice on this or related questions, I'd be very appreciative. I realize it's a big topic. TIA. Norman L. Kleinberg ------------------------------ From: Fred@mac-addict.com (Fred) Subject: Wanted: Telecom Instructors Organization: fred Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1999 19:07:05 GMT Telecom Instructors Wanted TeleSkill is looking for telecommunications profesionals to develop courses for the telecommunications industry and to moderate these courses on-line and in class. If you have developed a telecom course and need a distribution path or have experience moderating courses, we'd be interested in hearing from you. About TeleSkill TeleSkill is an integrated training, recruiting, and career development company, founded to meet the human resource needs of the telecommunications industry. Our mission is to be a strategic partner to telecom firms, by providing their most important resource in these chaotic times - trained and talented people. Our head office is located in Vancouver, BC, with subsidiary offices in other major Canadian cities. Our website is located at: http://www.teleskill.com/ Contact info: Send a resume along with a representative sample of your course (in Word format and if applicable) to: info@academytelecom.com with the subject "Telecom Instructor Position" ------------------------------ From: sveinsson@my-dejanews.com Subject: 5ESS Y2K Compliance Testing Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1999 16:40:44 GMT Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion I am looking for sources of information on Lucent 5ESS Y2K compliance testing 2 - test scripts, test results, etc. Any help on this will be greatly appreciated. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Individual users who wish to examine their own computer for Y2K problems -- if any -- can receive a free program for doing so in the Telecom Archives http://telecom-digest.org on the Y2K compliance page which is a new feature. Look for it in the main page to the archives. And on the topic of the archives, this is just a reminder that I more or less finished the renovation of the archives web pages on Tuesday and welcome visitors to examine what is there now. Of particular help to me would be comments and suggestions from professional web page developers who have a good background in javascripting. I did what you will see there now, but I would like some help in polishing up the code, the presentation, etc. Feel free to dump the source on each page and examine it, then let me know what you think. The address again is http://telecom-digest.org ... if you have not been there since yesterday, please visit soon. You even get a picture of me! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #49 ***************************** From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Apr 14 19:02:17 1999 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA21326; Wed, 14 Apr 1999 19:02:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 19:02:17 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <199904142302.TAA21326@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Subject: TELECOM Digest V19 #50 TELECOM Digest Wed, 14 Apr 99 19:02:00 EDT Volume 19 : Issue 50 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Survey: `One-size-fits-all' Privacy Won't Work On Net (Monty Solomon) Response to Net Plant Question (Steve Sokal) Employment Opportunity in MA (Chuck Bizier) FCC Ups Charge For Second Phone Line (Monty Solomon) Microsoft Moves to Mend IE Security Bug (Monty Solomon) Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' (Robert S. Hall) AOL and Their Friends at US Customs (John Shaver) Re: Do LD Companies Sell Subscriber Lists to Telemarketers? (Al Iverson) Re: Yahoo Privacy Holes Signal Need for Standards (Art Walker) Re: Who Invented the Telephone? (Billy Harvey) Re: Who Invented the Telephone? (Brad Ackerman) Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines (Kim) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications 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, 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-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 twenty 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: Survey: `One-size-fits-all' Privacy Won't Work On Net Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:04:18 -0400 Survey: `One-size-fits-all' Privacy Won't Work On `Net; AT&T Labs-Led Study Sheds Light on User Preferences for Protecting Internet Privacy April 14, 1999 10:29 AM EDT FLORHAM PARK, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 14, 1999--A variety of approaches may be needed to make people feel secure about the privacy of their personal information on the Internet, according to an AT&T Labs-led research study released today. The research also suggests that a combination of privacy policies and "seals of approval" can significantly raise people's confidence. Users were almost as willing to provide a Web site with their e-mail address as they were to name their favorite snack or TV show, the study found, while they consider phone numbers more private than any personal information other than credit card and social security numbers. They were less likely to provide information about themselves that could be shared for marketing purposes, and the vast majority were unwilling to share any information that would identify their children by name, age or address. This has implications for both public policy decisions and for development of technology tools to assist Internet users in protecting their privacy. The researchers evaluated users' reactions to different methods of protecting the privacy of their information online, and to different methods of Web sites requesting information from them. The study has been submitted to the upcoming Federal Trade Commission workshop on Consumer Protection in the Electronic Marketplace. "Beyond Concern: Understanding Net Users' Attitudes About Online Privacy" is based on a survey of FamilyPC Magazine families administered by researchers at AT&T Labs, Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California-Irvine. The researchers are part of the World Wide Web Consortium effort to implement privacy protocols such as the Platform for Privacy Preferences (P3P), and to design suitable interfaces for a system whereby users can tell whether Web site privacy policies match their personal preferences. "Our results suggest that very simple interfaces may be suitable for users who either have strong feelings or are only marginally concerned about online privacy," said Lorrie Faith Cranor, a Secure Systems researcher at AT&T Labs, which led and funded the study. "However, for the majority of users, a variety of mechanisms may be needed. It seems unlikely that a `one-size-fits-all' approach to online privacy will succeed." Cranor's co-authors are Joseph Reagle of MIT/Harvard and UC's Mark Ackerman. Highlights of the study, in which some 380 members of FamilyPC Magazine's Family Testers participated, included: Some types of data are more sensitive than others. While respondents were generally comfortable providing information to Web sites about their preferences, most said they would never or rarely feel comfortable providing phone, credit card or social security numbers. Information to be shared with other companies or organizations is more sensitive. While respondents were concerned about the kind of information they provided to a Web site, how it would be used and whether it would identify them, the most important factor was whether it would be shared with others. A joint program of privacy policies and privacy "seals of approval" seems to provide a level of user confidence comparable to legislation, although the survey also showed people are confused about privacy seals. Users were presented with a scenario where a Web site with interesting information on a favorite hobby asked a visitor's name and postal address in order to provide free pamphlets and coupons. Respondents who were unsure or unwilling to provide the information were more likely to do so if the Web site had a privacy policy and a "seal of approval" from a well-known organization, such as the Better Business Bureau. Users dislike automatic data transfer and unsolicited communications. When asked about possible browser features that would make it easier to provide information to a Web site, 86 percent reported no interest in doing so without their taking some action. And 61 percent of those who said they would be willing to provide their name and postal address to a Web site to receive free pamphlets and coupons were less likely to do so if the information was shared with other companies for marketing purposes. "Cookies", used by many Web sites to identify users whenever they visit, drew a range of responses depending on how they would be used. Fifty-two percent said they were concerned about cookies, while 12 percent admitting not knowing what they were. Most people said they had changed their browser settings to something other than accepting all cookies without warning, but would agree to Web sites using such persistent identifiers to provide a customized service or advertising. The sample of heavy U.S. Internet users, taken last November, is important for understanding how users will act in the future. The researchers are continuing to analyze the data and plan to provide more details in future reports. The study is at: http://www.research.att.com/projects/privacystudy/. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Apr 99 11:04:00 EST From: Steve Sokal Subject: Response to Net Plant Question Ashley West has the unenviable task of explaining to her students asked what net plant is. This gets to the heart of regulation of all public utilities. The following quote from Public Utility Accounting: Theory and Application by James E. Suelflow (1973 MSU Public Utilities Studies) p.159 sets up the basic framework: Economic regulation of public utilities serves the consumer by providing the utilities with guidelines for charging just and reasonable rates. These same regulations fulfill the commissions obligation of enabling the utilities to earn a fair return on its investment... The rule provides that consumer payments, when aggregated, will produce sufficient revenues to cover the utilitys expenses of operation, including depreciation, income taxes, and all other taxes such as property (ad valorem), gross revenue, employment, and excise, and allow the firm to earn a fair return on its rate base. The Uniform System of Accounts established by the FCC and the state utility commissions describes Rate Base as the sum of: Telephone Plant in Service Noninterest Bearing Telephone Plant under Construction Telephone Plant Held for Future Use Materials and Supplies Customer Prepayments Cash Working Capital less Accumulated Depreciation Amortization Reserve Unamortized Expense Deferrals Amortization Reserve Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes Net plant is a more limited concept used to set rates for individual services. It is Telephone Plant in Service less accumulated depreciation. Stated another way, a telephone company is entitled to a fair return on the undepreciated value of its equipment used to provide service to the public. Hope you didn't mind dealing with an accounting question. ------------------------------ From: Chuck Bizier Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 07:25:36 PDT Subject: Employment Opportunity in MA Patrick, Do you know anyone who may be interested in this company? This is truly a huge opportunity. I'm sure you can figure out who the company is - and I'd be happy to tell you if you can think of anyone who may be interested. They're also looking for a Marketing Manager. Chuck Bizier 603-430-2010 This is a startup in Massachussetts who needs a Transmission Engineer. They'll relocate them, pay them whatever it takes and give them significant pre-IPO equity. If you know of anyone who could do this, I would love to tell them more about the company. They're are making a true terabit router which has been verified as the fastest technology by the MIT VLSI Standards Committee. Transmission Systems Engineer This position will involve working with large telecom customers, understanding their needs, and effectively translating them into our product requirements. This person will also be responsible for staying abreast of major trends in the industry and will follow technical forums such as OIF and ITU. The candidate will make presentations to customers and assist them with their network architectures. Extensive knowledge of the telco infrastructure, SONET/SDH protocols, DWDM, Digital Cross-Connects, and telecom switching/transmission equipment is required. The ideal candidate will have a BSEE/MSEE with minimum of 8+ years in the telecom industry as a systems engineer designing and implementing transmission infrastructures. ------------------------------ Reply-To: Monty Solomon From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Ups Charge For Second Phone Line Date: Tue, 12 Apr 1999 17:15:12 -0400 By DAVID ROHDE Network World, 04/12/99 WASHINGTON, D.C. - The government has made it official: The federally mandated monthly charges on separate Internet access phone lines will be higher than charges for primary telephone links for telecommuters and small-office workers. The Federal Communications Commission last month ruled that only the first phone line in a person's residence or small-office location is eligible for the lowest possible monthly Subscriber Line Charge (SLC) of $3.50. The monthly fees for all other phone lines will be higher, and will depend on the type of location (see chart). http://www.nwfusion.com/news/1999/0412primar.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 01:14:43 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Microsoft Moves to Mend IE Security Bug By Paul Festa Staff Writer, CNET News.com April 12, 1999, 11:55 a.m. PT Microsoft today said it is moving to plug a security hole in its Internet Explorer browser that could reveal local files and permit window spoofing. The bug lets a malicious Web author add a small suffix to a URL in order to misrepresent its origin. As a result, IE could wind up treating the Web site as though it were part of the client's local domain, such as within a corporate intranet, bypassing IE's security zones. The bug affects versions 4 and 5 of the browser. http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,34969,00.html ------------------------------ From: Robert S. Hall Subject: Re: Lawsuit Says MCI 'Redlines' Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 21:28:18 +0800 Reply-To: robhall@syssoft.net Pat: Thought I'd throw in my two cents worth on the issue of redlining and MCI. I've been living in Hong Kong for 14 years. I've had an AT&T calling card for 16+ years, and I've never had a problem making calls from anywhere in the world using it. 5 years ago or so, I received an invitation from MCI and American Airlines to enjoy the benefits of MCI's rates and Aadvantage Airmiles to boot. "Great", I thought - their rates were cheaper than AT&T. My parents live in Michigan. They have a cottage in the northern part of the state - a sleepy little hamlet surrounding 2 lakes that is a welcomed break from the cement jungle I call home, when it comes time for a vacation. Having received my MCI card, and having used it to make calls from a number of countries back to the States, and within the States (mainly from airports), I thought I had a tool to use when checking in with home in Hong Kong from the lake. WRONG!!! On my first attempt to call from a payphone (one of only two in the village), I received a similar reply - you are calling from a high-fraud area. I tried three or four times (from the same payphone, mind you) and got the same story. I finally gave up and went back to using AT&T. No problems - or so I thought. On the way out of the States, I attempted to make calls from O'Hare and SFO. This time I was told that my card had been cancelled due to fraudulent use!!! Now, you can't tell me that MCI doesn't expect me to be making international calls from my card - I live overseas for goodness sake! AND, I was attempting to make calls to my 'home country' to my registered home number, using their product. I gave in and let them cancel my card. My AT&T (and subsequently Global One) card served my needs just fine. This situation reminds me of my Blue Cross "Taipan" (i.e. top of the line, personal) insurance policy. Pay outrageous premiums for 5+ years while only making a few outpatient visits each year. As soon as I needed an once-off operation, they put a 100% loading on my outpatient and hospitalization premiums, considering me a "high risk". "Screw You" corporate America, just the same as you do to us! Where do I sign up for this Class Action lawsuit? Rob Hall Hong Kong [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have not heard of the litigation with MCI being turned into a class action as of yet, but I would love it if it was. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 08:51:19 -0700 From: John Shaver Subject: AOL and Their Friends at US Customs Pat: In your V47 #19, you described what happened to a new screen name almost immediately. A few years ago, the Customs Department took over a porn site using RICO. They had then, with the assistance of AOL (several years ago), used it as a site to entrap people. Perhaps they are still doing that. John [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, US Customs and the US Postal Service are still operating that child pornography mail order business down in south Florida, so it is quite possible they are using their good friend Steve Case to help them entrap new victims. It works like this: They decide that some person is probably interested in child pornography. The object then becomes make that person guilty no matter how much expense or effort has to be put into it. Truth is not a factor here; no one gives a damn about something like truth. They begin bombarding that person with advertising through the mail (and in recent years, spam on the internet) describing what they have to offer. The best known case -- the one that made the newspapers a few years ago -- was a farmer out in the middle of Nebraska somewhere. For about five years, they mailed him at least weekly flyers and advertising matter containing kiddie porn. Finally after that period of time, he took the bait they were holding out, and ordered one of their magazines; high quality glossy magazines they produce there at their plant in south Florida. They delivered it by mail, and required his signature. They were waiting outside his door, hiding and watching as he signed for the large envelope and accepted it. Once he signed and had the envelope in his hands -- maybe thirty seconds later -- they lunged, arresting him for possession of child porn, etc. He was found guilty at trial, but later the trial judge was reversed on appeal. In a few cases they did not bother with years of solicitation trying to get people to order from them, they simply mailed it out and lurked in the bushes when the postal carrier made delivery. But they quit cutting corners like that when every one of those cases was lost. You can't cut corners or take shortcuts in their business! With the advent of personal computers, a service like AOL became the perfect place to go to find new people to entrap. Steve Case has his own baggage to carry around with him, they said, and perhaps he can be pursuaded to work along with us. Saint Stephen understood exactly what they were saying and provided them with screen names and the ability to dump all over the Internet. What a boom, a bonanza for the government-operated kiddie porn business in America! No more sending out paper mail, waiting weeks or years for replies while hoping-to-god-the-route-carrier-delivered-it-to-the-right-address- and-that-it-does-not-get-stolen-from-the-mail-before-it-reaches- our-victim ... now we can bombard those fools daily with our stuff, show them samples of it on line, get their credit card number and arrest them the next day. And what about those self-righteous netizens who complain? Oh, well just set up a mailbox called 'abuse' and let them write complaints all they want. I dunno about you, but as for me, I would hate to have to tell my family and neighbors what I did for a living. Oh! You work for the US Customs Department? What do you do there? ... "well I prepare and mail out free samples of child pornography. We figure if we (e)mail enough of it to millions of people, at least a few will decide to see what it is all about. We can then arrest them and fulfill the real purpose of every law enforcement officer in America: to create more criminals." What a way to earn a living! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 03:40:41 -0500 From: radparker@radparker.com (Al Iverson) Subject: Re: Do LD Companies Sell Subscriber Lists to Telemarketers? Organization: See sig before replying In article , John L. Meissen wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I suspect they do, but could not prove > it. I will tell you who else sells things they should stay away from: > America On Line apparently has arrangements to provide every single > new screen name to some spam outfits. Consider this experience: my > personal AOL account is under my real name, although I rarely use AOL > for anything at all. I had occassion about a month ago to set up a > new screeen name for a single mailing to help out a non-profit group > here locally. The screen name was totally off the wall, just picked > out of the blue. Within about *five minutes, maybe less* approximatly > a dozen spams hit the mailbox. This is even before any outgoing mail > left AOL, so the name could not have been picked up elsewhere along > the net, etc. Five or six of the spams were promoting an adult web > site, the others were variations on make money fast. And since that > point in time, there has been not a single piece of mail to that > screen name, except for the one or two pieces of mail expected by > the group I was helping. > > Now, you try and convince me that AOL did not either generate those > spams or provide the new screen name to whoever did. Who else could it > have been with a dozen spams all hitting the mailbox a few seconds > apart over a period of a couple minutes, within five minutes of AOL > okaying the new screen name? Someone did say to me they had 'reasonable > evidence' that AOL does indeed own a couple of adult web sites they > won't admit to (owned by some subsidiary, etc). PAT] You're being silly. AOL does not facilitate users sending you porn spam. What happened was that either you picked a name that existed previously, or, more likely, you either entered a chat room, or you created a profile for youself. Unethical bulk mailers have software that pulls email addresses (screen names) from both user profiles and chat room profiles. You did something that allowed yourself to be tracked. I suspect AOL's current challenge is rewriting various bits of their interface so that this is no longer possible. Hasn't happened yet, but I know it will eventually. If you want a more detailed explanation, stop on by the newsgroup news.admin.net-abuse.email. Al Iverson radparker.com Al Iverson -- Web: http://al.radparker.com/ -- Home: Minneapolis, USA STOP! If you are going to email me a reply, you need to keep the word "SWANKY99" in your reply,otherwise your message may be tagged as spam. Send me no unsolicited advertising, as I will always return it to you. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There were no chat room visits under that screen name, nor a profile created, at least not within the first five minutes or so of the screen name creation. Regards a 'previously used screen name' my understanding is that is impossible, at least for several months to a year after a name has been 'retired'. People have said that in the creation of a screen name they would make some small error in the way it was displayed, delete the name and try to create it again in the style they wanted only to be told by the software that the name was 'in use by another subscriber' or not available presently. But I had not considered your scenario otherwise, and it makes sense. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Art.Walker@onesourcetech.com (Art Walker) Subject: Re: Yahoo Privacy Holes Signal Need for Standards Organization: Recovering Nebraskans Clinic - Denver, CO Reply-To: Art.Walker@onesourcetech.com Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 18:45:33 GMT >[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know what is going on with >Yahoo lately, but they seem to really be slipping up in a lot of >ways. Some of their software is just perfectly buggy, and a letter >to their suggested addresses just gets back a form answer saying >they will look at it. Nothing ever really gets fixed. My advice would be to drop Yahoo, and find a more professionally-run outfit. Art [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, not yet. Of the several desktop news tickers I have examined, Yahoo is by far the best. Desktop News absolutely demands a full inch of screen real estate and intermingles advertising with news headlines. They will allow it to auto-hide, but that seems to be irregular at times which could be due to my machine. 7am.com has a sort of skimpy product, which is only java applet-based one I could find to use on http://telecom-archives/chat ... there is another that takes an inch of space or two inches if you allow it with four ticker lines running at once and an advertising box on one end. You read what they give you to read. Yahoo by comparison has no ads, the news is what you said you wanted to recieve, the ribbon can be set for any size you want, and moved all over the screen. It will reside as a taskbar item and autohide with the rest of the existing task bar if desired. Yahoo has licensed their ticker to others as well, such as the US House of Representatives, which operates it under the name 'whiptick' providing the same Yahoo news as you want it, plus a small segment of news from the House majority leader. You are notified of any mail in your Yahoo mailbox, and get there merely by clicking the icon on the right side of the ticker. I have mine very carefully set just where I want it on the desktop, 'always on top' and 'glued to the desktop' so it won't accidentally get kicked out of the way. I have the ribbon narrowed to the smallest print I am able to easily read, and if I am running a browser such as IE, the ribbon fits very neatly under the browser and scrolls along without blocking the view of anything else. It takes almost no CPU resources at all -- things sometimes get a little bit slower -- and you can set the background and text colors as you like. I would opt for Yahoo Ticker (or one of their licensees, such as whiptick or a couple other organizations who run it with their own news inserted as part of it) anytime, and recommend it to anyone who wants up to the minute news and weather on line without having to specifically go to some web page to get it. But they have to make it work right, or it is useless and I have to assume there is no such thing as a good, advertising-free news ticker on the net. Another useful service is weather.com .. define the data you want, and you get it each time you call their page. Tell it to make your local community's weather forecast the default, then bookmark it on your own start page. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 16:02:41 EDT Subject: Re: Who Invented the Telephone? From: Billy Harvey > I read once that a man by the name of Antonio Meucci, who was born in > Florence, Italy and moved to the USA had invented a telephone in > 1857. Do you know anything about this claim? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The 'official' inventor of the ... > I somehow remember the name 'Meucci' as a person who did make some > improvements in *telegraphy* around the late-middle of the 19th > century. Any reader comments? PAT] This document is online and may be a starting place for anyone interested in Meucci: http://www.borderlands.com/newstuff/research/hearing.htm ------------------------------ From: bsa3@cornell.edu (Brad Ackerman) Subject: Re: Who Invented the Telephone? Date: 14 Apr 1999 16:28:13 -0400 Organization: NERV GeoFront, Tokyo III In response TELECOM Digest Editor who noted in response to Paul Pacini : > I somehow remember the name 'Meucci' as a person who did make some > improvements in *telegraphy* around the late-middle of the 19th > century. Any reader comments? PAT] The Encyclopaedia Britannica contains no record for Mr. Meucci. However, the catalogue of the Cornell University Library does list a book entitled _Antonio Meucci, Inventor of the Telephone_ by Giovanni E. Schiavo, published by Vigo Press, NYC, in 1958, LOC call number TK 6018 .M59 S32. There's also a bibliography, _Antonio Meucci : l'inventore e il suo tempo_ [what's the convention for capitalization of titles in Italian?] by Basilio Catania, published in Rome by Edizioni Seat in 1994, LOC call number TK 6143 .M59 C35 1994. I'd examine these books, but I'm currently trying to complete two final projects and a 20-page paper. Perhaps someone else is interested in following up on this claim. [These books are available through ILL.] Brad Ackerman N1MNB "...faced with the men and women who bring home bsa3@cornell.edu the pork, voters almost always re-elect them." http://skaro.pair.com/ -- _The Economist_, 31 Oct 1998 ------------------------------ Date: 14 Apr 1999 20:08:46 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com From: kim@aol.com (Kim) Subject: Re: Telephone Pairs and Lines Norman L. Kleinberg inquires > My question has to do with the number of different lines I can have in > the house: am I limited to a total of 4 numbers (lines), or can the > TELCO hook, at least in theory, different numbers to each line? Speaking for a house that at one time had 7 telephone lines (we're down to 6 now), I can assure you that you can have more than 4 lines. Of course, the telephone company might need to run additional wires to your house (with associated extra cost to do so). But it can be done. Kim Brennan (kim@aol.com) Duo 2300c, PB 2400, VW Fox Wagon GL, Corrado SLC, Vanagon GL Syncro http://members.aol.com/kim Duo Info Page: http://members.aol.com/kim/computer/duo ?'s should include "Duo" in subject, else they'll be deleted unread. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V19 #50 *****************************