TELECOM Digest     Tue, 7 Mar 2000 17:33:00 EST    Volume 20 : Issue 14

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: NXX by NPA (Clarence Dold)
    Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Ross McMicken)
    Re: Long Lines Bells (and intrastate dial rates) (Don Kimberlin)
    Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert!2.)Urban Legend Alert! (John Hines)
    Re: Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 (C. Wilkinson)
    Re: On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend (John Nagle)
    Query on LNP (Krishnan PP)
    Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (John R. Levine)
    Workplace E-Mail Privacy Bill Reintroduced In Calif. (Monty Solomon)
    Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Curtis R. Anderson)
    Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast (Ed Ellers)
    Last Laugh! The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) (Monty Solomon)
    Last Laugh! Hell Hath no Fury Like a Telco Scorned (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
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
                        611 Poplar Street
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 805-545-5115
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe/unsubscribe:  subscriptions@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/
mailing list on the internet in any category!

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, Swizerland * * 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: Clarence Dold <dold@rahul.net> Subject: Re: NXX by NPA Date: 7 Mar 2000 17:55:21 GMT Organization: a2i network Reply-To: dold@email.rahul.net Ben Schilling <Ben.Schilling@oci.state.wi.us> wrote: > You can get the lists from http://www.nanpa.com/ . They are under Central
> Office Codes (Prefixes). There are sixteen zip files in the entire set.
How strange. Those are incredibly out of date and incomplete. Looking at WSUTLZD.TXT, I find 707-965 (my home) with no description. Looking for NAPA, I find it listed as 415-217. I don't remember how long ago Napa became the 707 NPA. Wait a minute ... I see a pattern. The older NPA-NXX are incomplete, but the "newer" ones are properly described. But there is a _LOT_ of data missing. My dad's house is in in San Leandro, but listed as Oakland. There are 21338 entries in WSUTLZD.TXT 1556 different "Names" 4501 NPA-NXX have no description. 21% The most reliable thing seems to be a one-time download of the NNACL, at $150, and free quarterly downloads of NNAG, from http://www.trainfo.com/tra/caalog.htm There's something about 'non-commercial use' that might bear investigating. The TPM-VH CD that I buy is a commercial product. Clarence A Dold - dold@email.rahul.net - Pope Valley & Napa CA.
From: Ross McMicken <mcmicken@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Re: Telephone-Pole Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 12:55:15 -0600 On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 08:18:38 -0500, Don Kimberlin <dkimberlin@prodigy.net> wrote: > In article Fri, 03 Mar 2000 12:38:16 -0600 (John Hines
> (jhines@enteract.com) wrote:
>> ... power line poles, owned and maintained by Commonwealth Edison,
>> and the telephone, and cable companies lease space from
>> them. ComEd then exchanges the electricity to run the city/village
> for the lease on the right of way for the poles.
> ... This may be one of those numerous twists and turns in the complex
> byways of life for common carrier utilities in the United States, but
> in the southeastern part of the country, and a few other spotty areas
> I've worked in, the streets and sidewalks are public right-of-way,
> available free to any state-certificated common carrier -- i.e., no
> leasing by municipalities or otherwise.
> ... In fact, in southern states, highway rights-of-way are free for
> anyone to use (with demonstration of proper engineering drawings and
> construction plans).
> ... Do we have here an urban legend of telecommunications, with someone's
> assumption bubbling into what seems plausible fact?
> ... In the interest of accuracy, I must challenge the poster to prove his
> claim with some factual references - and more than a reported phone call
> to an unnamed town or utility employee, please!
In Houston, Tx, the utilities pay a franchise fee to the city for use of the city rights of way. I believe it amounts to about 4 percent of gross revenues. We periodically get big squabbles over how much of the fee can be charged to the consumer.
Date: Tue,07 Mar 2000 14:33:58 -0500 From: Don Kimberlin <dkimberlin@prodigy.net> Subject: Re: Long Lines Bells (and Intrastate Dial Rates) In article: 7 Mar 2000 09:59:19 GMT , Hal Murray (murray@pa.dec.com) wrote: >> Many moons ago I asked someone from New England Telephone why in state
>> toll rates were so ridiculously high. They explained that AT&T Long
>> Lines
>> handled all in-state toll traffic. It looks like NET at the time didn't
>> have their own toll switches so they let AT&T rape the crap out of us.
> Many moons ago in California, the PCU set intra-state long distance
> charges high in order to cross-subsidize residential rates.
> For a while, it was cheaper to call the east coast than across the
> state.
... Your California story was accurate; the New England Tel story was an urban fable. While Long Lines did, indeed, operate most all the toll switches for New England Telephone, the rate-setting within each state with short-haul toll rates set high to subsidize local dial tone was the real story everywhere. ... While pundits of the business tried to rationalize telecommunications "costs" for short distances being like those faced by taxi drivers or even airlines as having higher "start-up" or "loading/unloading" costs, any significant reason for higher short-haul dial rates melted away when customers dialed their own calls.
From: John Hines <jhines@enteract.com> Subject: Re: 1.)Thread Creep Alert! 2.)Urban Legend Alert! (Re: Telephne-Pole Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 15:41:08 -0600 Organization: US Citizen, disabled with MS, speaking solely for myself. Don Kimberlin <dkimberlin@prodigy.net> wrote: > In article Fri, 03 Mar 2000 12:38:16 -0600 (John Hines
> (jhines@enteract.com) wrote:
>> ... power line poles, owned and maintained by Commonwealth Edison,
>> and the telephone, and cable companies lease space from
>> them. ComEd then exchanges the electricity to run the city/village
>> for the lease on the right of way for the poles.
> ... This may be one of those numerous twists and turns in the complex
> byways of life for common carrier utilities in the United States, but
> in the southeastern part of the country, and a few other spotty areas
> I've worked in, the streets and sidewalks are public right-of-way,
> available free to any state-certificated common carrier -- i.e., no
> leasing by municipalities or otherwise.
The deed to my house says I own the land, but that the village has a utility easement on it. The power lines are in the back, not on the street ROW, here in development. I know that for a fact, its surveyed, and that I have a power pole on the property as well. And it is the power company that shows up when the poles need replacing from storm damage, and that the phone guys have to wait for them. > ... In fact, in southern states, highway rights-of-way are free for
> anyone to use (with demonstration of proper engineering drawings and
> construction plans).
It don't work that way around here. The village offers an exclusive monopoly on electric service, and those are the terms the contract are in. > assumption bubbling into what seems plausible fact?
No, you have my recollection of the news reports on the re-negotiating of the contracts, many of which expired in 2000. It was a big issue, since in order to make any changes to the system, every street lamp and stop light would have to be metered, which would add costs. > ... In the interest of accuracy, I must challenge the poster to prove his
> claim with some factual references - and more than a reported phone call
> to an unnamed town or utility employee, please!
http://www.ci.chi.il.us/Environment/EnergyManagement/ See the section on utility oversight. Or http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.westmont.il.us/government/village/manager/CompPlan/WebDocs/chapter_six.htm for another local village.
From: news@askadrian.com (Christopher Wilkinson) Subject: Re: Australia; Wireless Phone Number Portability 3/2001 Reply-To: news@askadian.com Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 17:28:20 GMT Organization: Cable Internet (post doesn't reflect views of Cable Internet) On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 08:28:07 GMT, David Lind <davidlind@my-deja.com> wrote: > Sooo glad to have this forum and the moderater back!!
> The Aussies have mandated wireless phone number portability to be implemented
> in 12 months. So what is holding us up?
Us being the US?
From: John Nagle <nagle@animats.com> Organization: Animats Subject: Re: On the Internet, Your Bank is Not Your Friend Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 12:15:16 -0800 Monty Solomon quoted: > Deposit This
> On the Internet, your bank is not your friend
> Hal Plotkin, Special to SF Gate
> Wednesday, February 23, 2000
This is a puff piece for Yodlee.com, which is a sort of "financial portal" that wants to act as your agent in managing your finanical affairs. Unfortunately, they also want to disclaim all liabilitiy when doing so: http://www.yodlee.com/help/terms.html Read those terms and conditions, and stay away. Anybody offering financial services should take financial responsibility for their errors. Yodlee definitely does not. You could even get stuck paying for third-party claims against Yodlee, and even their legal bills. John Nagle
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 02:20:39 +0530 From: Krishnan PP <krishnan.pp@ushacomm.co.in> Subject: Query on LNP Question: How does LNP (Local Number Portability) work for the following cases : Intra LATA call Inter LATA call I want to know the details of the location of the portability database, the LRN etc. Regards, krishnan
Date: 6 Mar 2000 20:33:49 -0500 From: johnl@iecc.com (John R. Levine) Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Organization: I.E.C.C., Trumansburg NY USA >> As a caller to a mobile I have to accept the price I will be charged and
>> have no way to shop for a better rate.
> You can always use a calling card, or choose a tariff which offers
> mobile-mobile calls at less than land-mobile rates.
Oh, but you can't. The price will be set by the recipient's telco, not the caller's. These numbers will work just like 500 or 900 numbers, which is why I've always said they belong in the otherwise nearly abandoned 500 SAC. Yes, every PBX and payphone in the country blocks calls to 500 numbers. There's a reason for that. 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: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 22:45:46 -0500 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Workplace E-Mail Privacy Bill Reintroduced In Calif. http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/00/144965.html By Sherman Fridman, Newsbytes SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, U.S.A., 03 Mar 2000, 10:09 AM CST California State Senator Debra Bowen (D-Redondo Beach) has developed something of a reputation as the state's legislative guru on high-tech matters. Now, she's shown that she can be tenacious as well when it comes to the issue of protecting the privacy of employee-generated e-mail. Senator Bowen introduced a bill in last year's session of the California State Legislature that would have prevented employers from monitoring the e-mail of employees unless employees first acknowledged in writing that they had been informed their employer had a specific e-mail monitoring policy. The bill passed both houses of the California legislature by a substantial bipartisan margin but was vetoed by Governor Gray Davis last October on the grounds that the bill's notification requirement would place too great a burden on employers. This year, Bowen has reintroduced, (as SB 1822), a workplace privacy bill that would make it illegal for companies to review the e-mail of employees, the Internet sites visited by employees, and the computer files created by the employee, without providing the employee with notification of the company' computer monitoring policy. Asked by Newsbytes why she reintroduced a previously vetoed bill, Senator Bowen said, "Look, I'm generally not a one-shot-and-out kind of legislator. This may be one of those ideas that takes two, three, or four charges up the hill before it gets signed into law because in some ways it requires people to look through the prism in a different way." Bowen acknowledged that she needed to do a better job of showing people, including the governor, that her bill wasn't about giving computer users special protections; rather, "it's about extending the same privacy protections provided to letter writers and phone users." According to Bowen, "Some employers argue that because they own the computers and pay for Internet access, they have the right to spy on their workers without telling them it's company policy. But these same companies don't have that right in any other part of the workplace. They can't find out what medication you're on even though they're paying for your health care, and they can't eavesdrop on your personal telephone conversations even though they own the phone." The issue of electronic monitoring in the workplace is one that's growing. In 1999, the American Management Association found that out of 1,000 corporations surveyed, 45 percent electronically monitor and record employee communications in the workplace, and 27 percent read their employees' e-mail messages. California has laws addressing employee telephone use at work, but computers are not covered The California Public Utilities Commission requires employers to inform employees when telephone conversations are recorded or monitored by either putting a beep tone on the line or by playing a recorded message. Bowen says that SB 1822 creates similar "right to know" laws to cover the new technologies that are used in today's workplace. Bowen's bill contains three main requirements; the first of which is a mandate that employers create and distribute to all employees the company's workplace privay and electronic monitoring policies and practices. The bill would also require employees to sign, either in writing or digitally by electronic signature, that they have read, understood, and received the company's monitoring policies and practices. The third major provision of the bill would give employees the right to access electronic data that the employer collects through monitoring, and the right to dispute or delete inaccurate data. Bowen is quick to point out that her bill doesn't outlaw monitoring, and says that employers have the right to fire employees who violate company policies and misuse company equipment. "But," says Bowen, "people have a right to know what those policies are before they get a pink slip." Reported by Newsbytes.com, http://www.newsbytes.com 10:09 CST Reposted 10:34 CST (20000303/Press contact: Jennie Bretschneider, 916-445-5953 /WIRES TOP, ONLINE, LEGAL, BUSINESS/BOWEN/PHOTO)
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 22:34:55 -0500 From: Curtis R. Anderson <gleepy@intelligencia.com> Organization: Misguided Followers Of the Late Nicholas Devereux Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast 73115.1041@compuserve.com wrote: > Modern SLCs do the conversion once and send all the lines digitally
> right into the switch, usually on a fibre pair direct from the
> SLC. This can actually be a preferred solution, as the fibre is immune
> to induced noise. The problem here is that space for a DSL DSLAM in
> the SLC cabinet is at a premium, if it exists at all. This makes it
> hard for the telco or CLEC to provide highspeed internet access.
Alltel comes right out on their web site and says they will NOT be putting DSLAMs in their DLC cabinets at this time. At least, Alltel managed to get the contractor to install the DLCs correctly; they have many of them servicing this rural part outside of the Jamestown, NY area. Dialup speeds for me average 49333 bps for inbound V.90. That isn't bad considering the local loop should be < 11000 feet from the DLC to the house. Speeds can peak up to a shocking 52000 under the very best conditions. I watched the contractors installing the DLC one day and got to talking about how my modem speeds improved. They were surprised V.90 even worked at all. They were nervous when I asked about how many T1 trunks were serving it, until I told them I read the Telecom Digest. That seemed to calm them down a lot. I was able to get from the contractor that Alltel did not plan to run fiber to the DLC at this time; copper seemed to be sufficient. Curtis R. Anderson, Co-creator of "Gleepy the Hen", SP 2.5?, KoX We eat korv, not surstrmming or lutefisk in western NY. Sorry. http://www.madbbs.com/users/gleepy/ ICQ: 50137888 mailto:gleepy@intelligencia.com UTM: PS 7036 7315, zone 17
From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com> Subject: Re: The DLC Epidemic Spreads to the Northeast Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 22:44:32 -0500 Julian Thomas <jata@aepiax.net> wrote: > I suspect that the DLC concept is old enough that originally it had to work
> with analog switches (good grief! SxS!!) as well as digital switches --
> hence the conversion back to analog."
Not just SxS by any means -- Western Electric's No. 1, 1A, 2 and 3 ESSes switched in the analog domain under CPU control, as did GTE Automatic Electric's EAX. (Nortel used to make clones of the WECo switches before the Bell Canada divestiture, so I suspect they didn't have their "own" analog switch and concentrated instead on the DMS line.)
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 20:55:30 -0500 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Last Laugh! The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) To: IETF-Announce: ; From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-christey-imps-00.txt Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 10:32:15 -0500 Sender: nsyracus@cnri.reston.va.us A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) Author(s) : S. Christey Filename : draft-christey-imps-00.txt Pages : 18 Date : 01-Mar-00 This draft describes a protocol suite which supports an infinite number of monkeys that sit at an infinite number of typewriters in order to determine when they have either produced the entire works of William Shakespeare or a good television show. The suite includes communications and control protocols for monkeys and the organizations that interact with them. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-christey-imps-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-christey-imps-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-christey-imps-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. [The following attachment must be fetched by mail. Command-click the URL below and send the resulting message to get the attachment.] <mailto:mailserv@ietf.org?body=ENCODING%20mime%0D%0AFILE%20/internet-drafts/ draft-christey-imps-00.txt> [The following attachment must be fetched by ftp. Command-click the URL below to ask your ftp client to fetch it.] <ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-christey-imps-00.txt>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 21:15:18 -0500 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Last Laugh! Hell Hath no Fury Like a Telco Scorned When we first met our players last June, dashing young Qwest had swooped down from the Rockies to steal local belle US West from the clutches of Bermuda-based Global Crossing. Because she hadalready marched halfway down the aisle with her Caribbean beau, US West didn't come willingly. But a backroom deal was struck, the bride surrendered several hundred million dollars in dowry, and the betrothed couple rode back to Denver to plan the wedding. http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,12621,00.html
End of TELECOM Digest V20 #14

Visit the Crazy Atheist Libertarian
Visit my atheist friends at Arizona Secular Humanists
Some strange but true news about the government
Some strange but real news about religion
Interesting, funny but otherwise useless news!