Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id PAA08011; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:28:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:28:10 -0400 (EDT) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199608261928.PAA08011@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #439 TELECOM Digest Mon, 26 Aug 96 15:28:00 EDT Volume 16 : Issue 439 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Re: Atlanta 911 and COCOTs: The Bomb Call Transcript (Howard Pierpont) Re: Atlanta 911 and COCOTs: The Bomb Call Transcript (Jerry Mahone) Re: Atlanta 911 and COCOTs: The Bomb Call Transcript (Hudson Leighton) Re: Atlanta 911 ... Transcript [Jewell's Involvement] (Dave Keeny) Atlanta Bombing: 9-1-1 Bashing (Greg Abbott) CCS7-E911 Information From FCC/NRC (egy@look.ca) Re: Microwave Rural Phone System? (Scott Nelson) Re: Rural Internet Access (Dave Hughes) Re: Rural Internet Access (Peter Morgan) Re: Is the Internet Slow? (Steven Lichter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Howard Pierpont Subject: Re: Atlanta 911 and COCOTs: The Bomb Call Transcript Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:52:19 -0400 Organization: ISS, Digital Semiconductor Working with the Fire Department as a Police Officer [supplement to the SP in a town that doesn't have a standing police force], I have observed the following. Dispatch: report of an automobile acvcident near the bridge on Rock Ave. We head out and can't find anything on the west end. FD: Where did the call originate? Dispatch: 7 Rock Ave. BTW -- This is the far east end of Rock Ave. We head to the location and look for the caller to try and determine where the problem really is. Often we do find the caller who is able to give better/more complete info. If we can't find anyone at the 911 ID location we will then fan out to try and find the incident. My point was that if the Dispatch had moved some forces to the location of the phone, I bet someone would have known where Centennial Park was without needing an physical address. Howard Pierpont [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: One thing that plagued the Chicago Fire Department under the old system used here for a half-century of calls to their dispatch number (FIre-7-1313) was the large number of 'sound- alike' addresses in the city. Person would call the Fire Department hysterically and say 'there is a fire at 1234 Damen Avenue' (most likely their own house) then disconnect in order to run off to safety. Before the dispatcher could inquire "do you mean 1234 *North* Damen Avenue or 1234 *South* Damen Avenue?", the party would be off the line. Of course this meant that two companies had to respond; one to each address several miles apart. One got a good call; the other had a false alarm. Or if it was a malicious prank call to start with, then both companies had a false alarm. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jerry Mahone Subject: Re: Atlanta 911 and COCOTs: The Bomb Call Transcript Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:06:08 -0400 Organization: Scientific Atlanta [ 911 transcript snipped ] > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That situation in Atlanta was certainly > a tragedy which was no doubt compounded by the confusion expressed by > police dispatchers shown above. > One victim of the explosion is Mr. Jewell, the security officer who > was involved. As everyone knows by now -- I trust -- he was completely > innocent of any complicity in the affair, yet the FBI saw fit to put > him through an incredible smear job -- a common FBI tactic -- in order > to find him guilty in the eyes of the public. PAT] What the TELECOM Digest Editor doesn't note is that the device was discovered *independently* from the 911 call; that is, the bomb was discovered without knowledge of the information in the 911 call. The lag was about ten minutes from the 911 call to the time the bomb was discovered, apparently. Furthermore, as I understand it, it is standard procedure to investigate the "first discoverer" of such a device. Often, that person is the one responsible for the planting of the device. In this case, their (the FBI's) investigation of Jewell was leaked and/or discovered by the local paper (the Atlanta Journal-Constitution). Again, because such an investigation is SOP, it wasn't too hard to speculate he would be investigated. The *press* is responsible for spreading his background around so widely (previous jobs, previous discipline problems, etc.). Finally, I don't know whether or not Jewell is culpable for this crime, but it has not yet been proven one way or the other. The evidence that is currently made public suggests he did not do it. My guess is that if the FBI determines he is innocent, they will make a statement to that effect. They did this with the Jordanian who was initially suspected in the Oklahoma City bombing; remember how whipped up everyone was in believing it was a Middle-Easterner who was responsible? Once again, the media put this suspect's image on the covers of the newsweeklies and daily papers and evening broadcasts ... only to find they were wrong. The FBI issued a statement clearing that man's name. In this case, they will likely do the same thing, but only when they are satisfied he is totally innocent. Note: I'm not defending the FBI or bashing the media in general, but in this case I believe the FBI has to be thorough, and the media should show more restraint. Just my .02. Jerry Mahone Email: jerry.mahone@sciatl.com WWW: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/1534 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thus far the FBI has done nothing to undo the damage they caused to Jewell's reputation, nor would I expect to hear anything from them anytime soon. Standard Operating Procedure by many law enforcement agencies seems to be to get the 'court of public opinion' involved early on, as they did for example with the one they allege to be Unabomber -- who they still have not put on trial. That way even if the facts in the case get in the way or the courts refuse to allow the police to massacre the constitution in the process, at least the person singled out still gets punished; and to many involved in law enforcement, that is what is important. You also point out that 'the first discoverer' is often times put through a lot of hassles and grief, and that should serve as a good lesson: when you see others break the law or you see something that seems remiss, **do yourself a favor and walk the other way**. Get involved at your own risk, especially if what you would reveal is likely to be an embarassment to the 'system'. We see this time and time again when, for example someone trying to be helpful points out holes in computer security -- especially in corporate environments -- and the response is that since the messenger embarassed the authorities the best way to deal with it is by killing the messenger or completely discrediting him at the very least. So Mr. Jewell, the little hired-cop embarassed the big guys; that will never, never do! He'll know better next time, I bet. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hudsonl@skypoint.com (Hudson Leighton) Subject: Re: Atlanta 911 and COCOTs: The Bomb Call Transcript Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:25:35 -0500 Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc. In article , James E Bellaire wrote: > The other half of the problem was a system that would not serve the > users. Their system continually refused to take Centennial Park as an > address, therefore *no one* could be dispatched because the computer > would not pass data. > Evidently the phone at the Days Inn was in the database, so police > could have known where the call was coming from immediately, but the > dispatch was held up by a lack of a street address for the target. > I wonder if someone claimed to have seen 'an accident on Route 13 > about a mile east of town' if that could have been entered, without a > dispatcher being required to find an address for something one mile > east of town. This is getting to be a problem, people call 911 on their cellphone, but have no idea as to where they are. "I am up the big tree in the woods that the BIG bear is trying to climb" I have called 911 on my cellphone from my car, and it can be a problem giving the operator a location that they will accept. In town is not bad Eastbound I94 at Stinson usually works, but westbound MN 5 at mile 57 doesn't. They will not accept a readout from my GPS :-(. I have heard some talk about passing the cell location on to the 911 system, but I don't think that can be a complete solution, because the area of a rural cell can be very large. ------------------------------ From: Dave Keeny Subject: Re: Atlanta 911 ... Transcript [Jewell's Involvement] Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 16:31:42 +0500 Organization: Telecommunications Techniques Corporation Reply-To: keenyd@ttc.com > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That situation in Atlanta was certainly > a tragedy which was no doubt compounded by the confusion expressed by > police dispatchers shown above. > One victim of the explosion is Mr. Jewell, the security officer who > was involved. As everyone knows by now -- I trust -- he was completely > innocent of any complicity in the affair, yet the FBI saw fit to put > him through an incredible smear job -- a common FBI tactic -- in order > to find him guilty in the eyes of the public. Pat, I realize this is off-topic, but I'm glad to hear that someone is as disgusted as I am with the "incredible smear job", as you put it, on Jewell. When I first heard the stories about Jewell's desire to be a cop, and his eagerness to be interviewed, etc., I thought it was a good idea to look into his potential involvement. But, within 24 hours he became the Olympic Bomber. Network news reporters were interviewing Atlantans, asking how it felt to find out that the bomber was (er, I mean, may be) one of their own. Not once did I hear law enforcement tell the media to stop flogging the man when there was no material evidence of guilt -- just circumstantial evidence which was only strong enough to raise suspicions, no more. The few times I heard the press remind us about the presumption of innocence was after they had spent minutes, or paragraphs, building a scaffold and practically walking Jewell up the 13 steps. It was clear from the outset that if Jewell turned out not to be guilty, his life could nonetheless be ruined, especially if the guilty party is never found. I wouldn't want anything other than a free press, but if Jewell has actually been let off the hook by law enforcement, I believe the media should have the decency to cover his innocence as a top story just as they covered speculations on his guilt as a top story. Sorry to unload here, but this has been under my skin for some time and your comment opened the door for my tirade. I feel better now. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Jewell was not 'let off the hook by law enforcement'. It was law enforcement who fed all the junk stories about him to the media, knowing the media would gobble it all up. That way, even if a court won't convict him -- and they gave up early on going in that direction -- at least the public will convict him. Ruin someone's life one way or the other; that's the basic idea. It would be better to get the guy convicted in court and have him in a prison somewhere, but you know how liberal all the judges are these days; at least fix things so some punishment gets administered, even if it is by the public. If you think I am starting to have a 'them versus the rest of us' mentality where law enforcement in the USA is concerned, you may be right. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:49:53 GMT From: Greg Abbott Subject: Atlanta Bombing: 9-1-1 Bashing Pat, I have been reading the numerous replies to your post of the 9-1-1 transcripts from the tragedy in Atlanta. I must put on my professional cap here and stick up for the operators working during this event. The operators were working with a dispatch system which seems very rigid with addressing requirements. The one we operate with is not unlike that, however, we do have the ability to force a location if the dispatch system does not recognize it. This happens most often when new businesses have opened which we may not have been notified about or have not gotten put into the system yet. We can certainly dispatch emergency assistance without an address, assuming that WE know where the call is. Often in these situations, we will have to press the caller for more specific information on what street they are on, what the nearest cross street is, other businesses/ landmarks in the vicinity, etc. When I was still a 9-1-1 Operator (or Telecommunicator), I *n*e*v*e*r hung up with a caller until I was certain that I could direct the emergency responders to the location in question. Now that we have Enhanced 9-1-1, something I implemented so I have never really gotten to work with it, a substantial amount of the confusion has been eliminated. However, everyone should remember that the data in the E9-1-1 database is only as good as the telephone company records. Which brings me to my second point. The failure of the system to provide a location for the coin phones is not the fault of the 9-1-1 center. The 9-1-1 center did not install those coin phones out there on the street. The telephone company did. The telephone company should have carried through and made sure the database was updated to reflect these coin phones, temporary or not. The lack of data CAN NOT be blamed on the 9-1-1 center. As for the operators attitude during the numerous calls, it sounds to me (and I've heard all the tapes) like they were trying to get help on the way. Things sound like they could have gone better, but how many bomb threat calls (and other emergency calls for that matter) didn't we hear about which went into the system just right and emergency responders were sent and on the scene within minutes and everything was wonderful? We didn't hear about those, did we? It's unfortunate that this one incident ended up like it did, but the 9-1-1 operators did everything they could, given the circumstances. If they were indeed getting dozens of bomb threats per day, maybe there should have been some better procedures set up. What I mean specifically is that the police department/FBI/(whatever law enforcement agency you want to insert here) should have provided a single point of contact at their main command post for the immediate relay of all calls of bomb threats. I think we often lose sight of the fact that 9-1-1 is really just a fancy answering service. We take the calls and dispatch them following directions given to us by the public safety agencies. We simply follow directions. I'm not saying that things don't go wrong sometimes, but after all, the 9-1-1 operators are human too. No matter how hard we try, we can not be superhuman like everyone thinks we should be. There is not a single profession which has not made mistakes, Doctors, Lawyers, Scientists, Fast Food Clerks, Police Officers, Fire fighters, Paramedics and 9-1-1 Operators ... we're all human, we all have a chosen profession which I hope we give our all to, but every now and then things don't go right and sometimes, this can cause tragedy. There are very few people who read this Digest regularly who are qualified in the least to criticize the operators for laughing or seemingly making light of the situation. I have seen some very competent 9-1-1 operators who laugh when they get so frustrated because a computer won't let them enter a call or the radio won't work so they can dispatch it or the police officers won't shut up long enough for you to get a word in edge-wise for something much more important than what they are yapping about. It's a laugh instead of a scream. This is a very difficult and stress filled job. NO ONE is qualified to criticize these dedicated professionals unless you have sat in that seat on a busy shift and felt what they feel. The only job with a greater stress level is air traffic controllers, and even they joke around during life threatening emergencies (example, the Souix City United Airlines crash a few years ago...). Look in the emergency room at your local hospital, the nurses keep their sanity by joking around, it's the same with any emergency profession, be it police, fire, EMS or 9-1-1. People who have never performed any services like this don't have a clue what it's like to work with tragedy 8,12,16 or 24 hours a day and try to maintain your sanity. We're not making light of the situations by any means, we realize that people are going through crises, but we have to maintain our own sanity ... like I said, we're only human. The 9-1-1 operators throughout the nation are the unsung heros of public safety. We process millions of calls each day in thousands of 9-1-1 centers. Very few of these calls are improperly handled - probably far less than any other profession could claim. The next time you meet a 9-1-1 operator of if you do have a need to call 9-1-1 with an emergency, take the time follow up later and tell the operator thank you. It is rare indeed for anyone to call and thank us for our part in the emergency response. In my 12 years behind the telephone, only once did I have anyone call and thank me. How many hours did I spend on the phone with frightened children because Daddy was beating Mommy? How many times did I reassure an elderly resident that help was on the way to check on the suspicious person knocking at their door at 3AM? How many people did I convince that killing themselves was not the answer and that I could get them help? How many times have I woken up at night in a cold sweat because eight years ago (before we had 9-1-1) I couldn't get a caller to tell me where or who he was and he killed himself by putting a gun to his head and pulling the trigger while talking to me on the phone? I'm only human too. So you may want to consider giving 'em a break and let them vent in any way necessary (as long as it's not in front of those in crisis) ... laughter, crying, screaming, whatever, as long as the job is getting done... which it is at this very moment in 9-1-1 centers throughout this great nation of ours. Well, that's my .02 cents worth. GREG ABBOTT 99999 11 11 http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/gabbott 9-1-1 COORDINATOR 9 9 1 1 KB9NBH 99999 == 1 == 1 INTERNET: GABBOTT@uiuc.edu 9 1 1 COMPUSERVE: 76046,3107 METCAD 9 1 1 VOICE: 217/333-4348 1905 E. MAIN ST. 9 111 111 FAX: 217/384-7003 URBANA, IL 61801 PAGER: 800/222-6651 PIN #9541 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:27:48 -0400 From: Egy@look.ca Subject: CCS7-E911 Information From FCC/NRC The FCC/NRC has dealt with the value of CCS7 and E911. The use of CCS7 routing and network infrastructure to provide Networked 911 (N911) is here. Network elements: E911-SCP (using AIN/IN) SSP (using AIN/IN) E911-CCS7 (Mediation device for TCAP) The information gathered reveal a lack of ideas "not technology" on how to provide a Reliable Networked 911 (N911) Service. The biggest issues found by the FCC/NRC where: 1. Network Reliability: a. Switches ............(resolved) b. ALI data base...........(resolved) c. Special E911 facilities...........(resolved) 2. Support for Mobile and PCS...........(resolved) I will share this information if interested persons post questions. ------------------------------ Date: 26 Aug 96 10:49:46 EDT From: Scott Nelson <73773.2220@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Microwave Rural Phone System? On 8/16/96, Dave Perrussel wrote: > I work for a company that has a field station in the middle of > the New Mexico desert. > Is there a commercially available product that will do a high > bandwidth (say 14,400 baud or 28,800 baud) using point to > point microwave that is reasonabally priced? Try Carlson Communications, and inquire about their Optiphone. It is a VHF/UHF device that I beleive you can license privately that will give you "toll quality" voice and data communications over the distance you are talking about. At one time, I knew that their product was strictly analog (as is a POTS line); however, they may have a digital version which will go above 28.8 kb/s. Not sure about that, but ask and let us know. Sorry, but I can't find their phone or address in my files. I know that their listed in {Telephony Magazine's} buyers guide. I thought I even had Jim Carlson's e-mail address somewhere around here ... nutz! Scott Nelson ------------------------------ From: dave@oldcolo.com Subject: Re: Rural Internet Access Date: 26 Aug 1996 15:58:10 GMT Organization: occ Reply-To: dave@oldcolo.com In , bsharp@cris.com (Brian M. Sharp) writes: > Is there any way people living outside a metropolitan area can get > internet access without having to pay per hour? With all the interest > in the internet, isn't there some service that can see the huge number > of people in this uncomfortable position? > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Some small towns have an ISP or two > in the community. Bill Pfieffer has told me for example that where > he lives, there are two or three ISPs including a Free Net in the > nearby (also relatively small) town of Springfield, Missouri. I think > it is just a matter of time until small towns everywhere are included > in the net. Maybe we need someone like Andrew Carnagie, the steel mill > baron of the 19th century who went around to small towns all over the > United States building public libraries, to do the same now with > Free Nets. A century later, there are still a large number of 'Carnagie > Library' facilities all over the country; for the most part still > using the endowments established for them by Andrew Carnagie. > I guess you could say this is my million dollar dream: to see libraries > throughout the USA connected to the internet; and to see Free Nets > in small towns everywhere. Today the great promise is that thing > sitting in front of your face as you read this message. Where are the > Carnagies and the Rockefellers to do today for America what those men > did a century ago? Where are they to join Bill Gates? You don't need Carnegies or Bill Gates to get rural communities - including all 15,000 US public libraries (1) connected to the net (2) operating a 'free net.' They can do it themselves, right now, for (relatively) peanuts of cost. What you *do* have to do is be sure the less-than-generous CEO's of RBOCs, LDCs, and cablecos don't act -- at the Washington, DC level to *prevent* small towns, neighborhoods, rural communities from connecting up with no-licence (or licenced but no comm cost) digital wireless. As the Principal Investigator of the National Science Foundation Wireless Field Test for Education Project, I have been evaluating, as well as our project installing and testing, a wide range (from 5Mbs wireless lans to 2Mbs 25 mile point to point spread spectrum, no licence (FCC Part 15) digital radios. Connecting up, for example, a middle school in Monte Vista, Colorado to the closest commercial POP in another city - Alamosa, 17 miles away, at 115KBS, using radios that cost $1,250 retail, with maybe $250 antenna costs. And extending, by relay techniques, that link to yet another town 22 miles from Alamosa. And working on reaching the smallest town we are working with - San Luis (850 pop) - that is about 35 miles away. We are about to link the wireless link to the small school, (300 or so students) with more bandwidth than they can yet us, via a small state technology grant ($26,000) no-cost wirelessly to five public access sites in the community at the Parish, at the Cultural Center (museum/library), town government, businesses via the artists of the town, and the county seat. Together with training for 100% of all local citizens, and effectively zero-per-hour costs for access to the net for the citizens, while the school district pays the commercial $300 a month POP cost (which means, via school taxes, the citizens are paying). And operating, at the school, the Web Site, BBS, designed in part by the students and teachers, for outside in, and inside out access -- in Spanish or English as your linguistic talents permit. i.e. the combination of no-licence, high performance, reasonable range (the last 20 miles), digital wireless, with school networking needs, (and school districts are where people in this country live, rural or urban) contains within it the seeds of 'community' networking, inclusive of the need to train/educate community adults on how to use these technologies. And libraries - both in-school ones (which in some *very* small towns are bigger than public libraries) and community ones, being part and parcel part of 'education' - integrated within such networks. (Just stick a $1,000 radio in the tiny library connected to its one PC and voila, you have public connectivity - and access to any 'free net' across town.) Point to multi-point radios are widely available now. So this is a 'do it yourself' rather than 'let Carnegie do it' approach which economically, as well as technologically is doable right now. And since the FCC is confronted with the requirement of the '96 Telecom Act to make proposal/plans for insuring that advanced telecom services are available to all citizens at affordable costs, with special emphasis on schools (84,000 of em) and libraries (15,000) this approach that we are revealing from our analysis (we are also visiting communities which have already done it wirelessly, and evaluating their cost benefit factors, technical reliability, and other factors for our report.) You can follow what we are doing, examining, by accessing http://wireless.oldcolo.com Dave Hughes dave@oldcolo.com ------------------------------ From: Peter Morgan Subject: Re: Rural Internet Access Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 07:59:50 +0100 In message Pat wrote: > Bill Gates is to be praised for the donation he made to the Chicago > Public Library system getting them 'online'. Now if Gates and a few > others would just do the same thing for libraries all over the United > States, so that even if there was no Free Net in town, people could > at least go to their local library and participate in the net. Well I saw the web site, but was surprised when I visited Chicago in November last year to find there were only two public access PCs for accessing the Internet. I was pleased there were no fees (in the UK some libraries and "internet cafes" charge up to US$6/half hour) but there was also no mention of Bill Gates doing anything for them ... ... Unless changes have taken places since November, in which case I'd be interested to know what has happened at the Harold Washington Library ... maybe the smaller libraries have better facilities per head of population likely to visit them? I'd like to see Free Nets across the UK, too, even our local staff in the libraries would like to offer internet access, but funds are a problem, everywhere :-( Peter [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not sure if their bureaucracy in the Chicago Public Library has yet managed to accomplish anything with the money Bill Gates gave them. (A million dollars, several months ago.) Had it been me, I'd have been out shopping that afternoon and within a few days to a week had things up and running. But you know how things go in Chicago; for all I know they may have squandered most of the money by now paying for some consultant or two to tell them how to spend whatever little was left over after the consultants looted the purse. PAT] ------------------------------ From: slichte@cello.gina.calstate.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: Is the Internet Slow? Date: 26 Aug 1996 09:01:44 -0700 Organization: GINA and CORE+ Services of The California State University dr@ripco.com (David Richards) writes: > The constantly predicted 'meltdown' of the Internet has not yet > happened. But, some providers (Netcom comes to mind) may have > localized traffic problems, and occasionally difficulties with > Nationwide connectivity providers and specific NAPs lead to local > congestion. Sprint, which supplies off campus access for many colleges is heading for one. There are times that you are online and the system just seems to go to sleep. I have typed in data and it could take upwards of five minutes to appear on screen, sometimes it takes so long that my software thinks I have stopped using the system without hanging up and drops. I have complained about that and modem ports that don't answer or answer and don't reply. I can't believe they act this way. Complaining to them or Calstate really does not good and since the Core/Gina system is going away next year and being replaced by a system operated by Sprint no one seems to care; sound a lot like what was happening just before PC Puruit went away. I'm now looking for a new provider, but I don't think I'll be able to get one for the cost of this since I pay a year what most pay each month. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II and Macintosh computers. ------------------------------ 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: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * 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: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu 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. * ************************************************************************* 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. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #439 ******************************