From owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Sun Jun 1 11:07:12 2003 Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com (brmea-mail-2.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA15063 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 11:07:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM ([129.146.1.45]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h51F3xYU014692; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 09:04:00 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (sunroof.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.168.88]) by engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h51F3pNn025523; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 08:03:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h51F5CTX024478; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 08:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0/Submit) id h51F5Ckw024477; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 08:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM (engmail2sun [129.144.134.19]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h51F59TX024470 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 08:05:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.42.14]) by engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h51F3Suc007045 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 08:03:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gcis.net (64-132-170-33.gen.twtelecom.net [64.132.170.33]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h51F3MLv022951 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 08:03:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from winMe [12.99.240.208] by smtp.gcis.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.07) id A5EE5AC013C; Sun, 01 Jun 2003 11:04:14 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Jimmy Zhang" To: Subject: [mobile-ip] IKE question: How should HA know the 'if interface=tunnel interface...' Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 08:02:20 -0700 Message-ID: <000001c3284e$cda7eb40$0300a8c0@riverside> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200305302024.QAA26429@ietf.org> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. Sender: owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Owner: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, We have the following policy table: (cited from mipv6haipsec draft #5) " mobile node SPD OUT: - IF interface = IPv6 tunnel to home_agent_1 & source = home_address_1 & destination = any & proto = MH THEN USE SA ESP TUNNEL: outer destination = home_agent_1 & local phase 1 identity = user_1 home agent SPD IN: - IF interface = IPv6 tunnel from home_address_1 & source = home_address_1 & destination = any & proto = MH THEN USE SA ESP TUNNEL: outer destination = home_address_1 & peer phase 1 identity = user_1 " When mobile node initiates IKE phase 2 negotiation with HA to establish the IPsec SA for return routability test, it only sends information like source, destination and protocol to HA in IKE message phase 2 ID payload. The MN has the HOTI packet to trigger this negotiation, so MN has its own way from HOTI to determine the interface information. However, how should HA know the interface part "IF interface = IPv6 tunnel from home_address_1"? If HA doesn't know this information, it is very likely to pick the wrong policy, and will reject the security association proposals. Thanks, Jimmy http://www.elmic.com From sentto-327560-7845-1054501924-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 17:12:39 2003 Received: from n32.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n32.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.100]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id RAA02138 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:12:39 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7845-1054501924-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.66.98] by n32.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 71896 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 21:12:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.73) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:02 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: KS4VT@aol.com Received: from [66.218.67.189] by n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:02 -0000 X-Sender: KS4VT@aol.com X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 11304 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 02:13:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 02:13:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n7.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.91) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 02:13:47 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.142] by n7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 02:13:47 -0000 To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "Mark" X-Originating-IP: 24.52.37.19 X-Yahoo-Profile: ks4vt X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 21:11:59 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 02:13:44 -0000 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Coast to Coast NEXTEL Direct Connect Tonight Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well I haven't seen the official announcement yet, but this evening my wife and her sister did a direct connect from Florida to California. The home systems for both phones are in Florida. Set up time was quick and there was no noticeable latency as the conversation flowed back and forth like both users were local to each other. If I have time tomorrow I'll try to get her on a landline and test the initial set-up time between the phones. Mark ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7846-1054501931-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 17:12:44 2003 Received: from n8.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n8.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.92]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id RAA02152 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:12:44 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7846-1054501931-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.199] by n8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 59283 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 21:12:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n25.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.81) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:10 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: wk4j@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.164] by n25.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:10 -0000 X-Sender: wk4j@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 91298 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 14:26:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 14:26:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n3.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.86) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 14:26:43 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.117] by n3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 14:26:43 -0000 To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Message-ID: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "Dennis Littleton" X-Originating-IP: 68.17.180.202 X-Yahoo-Profile: wk4j X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:06 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 14:26:39 -0000 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] i95 upgrade Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Does anyone know where I can obtain the R85.01.02 version of the i95cl software? Mine currently has R85.01.01 and that version does not support the camera. Dennis ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7847-1054501935-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 17:12:49 2003 Received: from n3.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n3.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.86]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id RAA02166 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:12:48 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7847-1054501935-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.200] by n3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 31645 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 21:12:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n1.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.64) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:14 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Phen440@aol.com Received: from [66.218.67.169] by n1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:13 -0000 X-Sender: Phen440@aol.com X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 50815 invoked from network); 31 May 2003 20:23:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 31 May 2003 20:23:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m08.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.163) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 May 2003 20:23:56 -0000 Received: from Phen440@aol.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v36.3.) id r.1ec.9ebc0a7 (25305) for ; Sat, 31 May 2003 16:23:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <1ec.9ebc0a7.2c0a695a@aol.com> To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com X-Mailer: 8.0 for Windows sub 910 From: phen440@aol.com X-Yahoo-Profile: phen440 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:11 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 16:23:54 EDT Subject: Re: [NEXTEL-1] Nextel Base Station Manuals Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1ec.9ebc0a7.2c0a695a_boundary" --part1_1ec.9ebc0a7.2c0a695a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit i am looking for the b370 manual --part1_1ec.9ebc0a7.2c0a695a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit i am looking for the b370 manual
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
--part1_1ec.9ebc0a7.2c0a695a_boundary-- From sentto-327560-7848-1054501969-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 17:13:22 2003 Received: from n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.78]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id RAA02182 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:13:21 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7848-1054501969-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.200] by n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 32670 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 21:12:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n13.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.68) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:48 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.166] by n13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:31 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 19326 invoked from network); 30 May 2003 23:07:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 May 2003 23:07:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf40bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.65) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 May 2003 23:07:03 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.155.225.88]) by imf40bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030530230917.UNVE26617.imf40bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 19:09:17 -0400 Message-ID: <3ED7E3F7.E5E509F@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:30 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 19:06:31 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] FCC- 05/30/2003 Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit QUARTERLY REPORT ON INFORMAL CONSUMER INQUIRIES AND COMPLAINTS RELEASED. News Release. News Media Contact: Rosemary Kimball at (202) 418-0511 CGB. Contact Thomas Wyatt at (202) 418-1400 FCC FILINGS. News Release. News Media Contact: Sharon Hurd at (202) 418-0504 OMR FCC CALENDAR OF EVENTS. News Release. News Media Contact: Sharon Hurd at (202) 418-0504 OMR -- Report No: CWS-03-45 Released: 05/30/2003. ANTENNA STRUCTURE REGISTRATION SERVICE INFORMATION ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. WTB Report No: CWS-03-44 Released: 05/30/2003. ANTENNA STRUCTURE REGISTRATION SERVICE INFORMATION APPLICATIONS ACCEPTED FOR FILING. WTB AMENDMENT OF PART 15 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES REGARDING SPREAD SPECTRUM DEVICES. Denied the Petition for Reconsideration filed by Warren C. Havens and Telesaurus GB, LLC. (Dkt No. 99-231). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 05/27/2003 by MO&O. (FCC No. 03-124). OET 1998 BIENNIAL REGULATORY REVIEW - AMENDMENT OF PART 18 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES TO UPDATE REGULATIONS FOR RF LIGHTING DEVICES. Terminated the proceeding without prejudice to its substantive merits. (Dkt No. 98-42). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 05/27/2003 by ORDER. (FCC No. 03-123). OET INTERSTATE POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY. Granted the Waiver Requests. Action by: Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. Adopted: 05/29/2003 by ORDER. (DA No. 03-1784). WTB ADDENDA: THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, RELEASED MAY 29, 2003, DID NOT APPEAR IN DIGEST NO. 102: Released: 05/29/2003. WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU ACTION REGION TEXAS-PANHANDLE, HIGH PLAINS AND NORTHWEST 700 MHZ REGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE ANNOUNCES FIRST MEETING. (DA No. 03-1869). WTB ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7849-1054501975-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 17:13:27 2003 Received: from n31.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n31.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.99]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id RAA02196 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:13:26 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7849-1054501975-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.194] by n31.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 66364 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 21:12:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.71) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 21:12:54 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.180] by n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:54 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 66549 invoked from network); 30 May 2003 21:54:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 30 May 2003 21:54:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf46bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.94) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 May 2003 21:54:26 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.155.225.88]) by imf46bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030530215639.VDLI4433.imf46bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Fri, 30 May 2003 17:56:39 -0400 Message-ID: <3ED7D2F0.1AF03964@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 21:12:51 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 17:53:53 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Nextel Communications SEC FILINGS ALERT Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------326BB7C3C1062305EA9945E7" --------------326BB7C3C1062305EA9945E7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit [Image] [Image]Investor Alert A Form S-3/A regarding Nextel Communications has been filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. Click on the following hyperlink to view this filing: http://ir.ccbn.com/ir.zhtml?t=nxtl&s=800&l=8 Please Note: The hyperlink for the filing may not retrieve the filing if the address extends to more than one line. If this should occur, please copy the full text of the address for the filing into the address box in your web browser. _________________________________________________________ [Image] This email alert service uses proprietary list management software provided by CCBN. Click Here to unsubscribe from this JoinMail list --------------326BB7C3C1062305EA9945E7 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="------------5E59B8D9A1D38A13A48D2A24" --------------5E59B8D9A1D38A13A48D2A24 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Investor Alert
A Form S-3/A regarding Nextel Communications has been filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. 

Click on the following hyperlink to view this filing: 
http://ir.ccbn.com/ir.zhtml?t=nxtl&s=800&l=8

Please Note: The hyperlink for the filing may not retrieve the filing if 
the address extends to more than one line. If this should occur, please 
copy the full text of the address for the filing into the address box in 
your web browser. 
_________________________________________________________
This email alert service uses proprietary list management software provided by CCBN.
Click Here to unsubscribe from this JoinMail list 
--------------5E59B8D9A1D38A13A48D2A24 Content-Type: image/gif Content-ID: Content-Disposition: inline; filename="C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\nsmailIO.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODlh1AE5ALP/AMDAwI88P7yLjXYEC6NSV+bV1q5qcMmgo+HIytO4vO7f4owDIOzq6/b1 9QAAAAAAACH5BAEAAAAALAAAAADUATkAQAT/EMhJq7046827/2AojmRpnmiqrmzrvnAsz3Rt 33iu73zv/8CgcEjELY5I5EBBSQ4CAMJAefA0pkrsYkC4FBIIRCLRuIzPCc4XXS663/C4HOaE TgxY7RYqpXrwSgFJW20UCmGIhRSIYQVqjAgMc5OUlZaXmJmam5ydnp+goaKjpKWmp6ipqqus ra6vsLGys7Q+gk5dFQ11UXqDgwMGAAFawRR9SAQGy8zNzgYCAALP1MwACc4ItdvcqLxXR8YA vMi/g3YWvksZB86OFtXUVQDtzdrd+PmevBUM6nzqBggcOPCAAj0D3km4FS6XBAMBIkZMY0Gi xYsXEwiwSADjRX0g/0OKHEmypMmTKFOqXMmypcuXMGPKnEmzps2bOHOynMIz4YUrPQM0kMJz i9GiSJEusEB0C8GnUAVCiUpVIAA8BB3q3HrS3BML5IoJaEC2rNkJAorlQsjkGFKKFZIiIMug Qd27ZZoKjMa1b0lcyAbcGxeo1zmPWiU0YOikLdNi8+Ii9RiRb9MtfP1qBskPQJ4ABRh+Lbcg gIBp05Qps+DPq7AL5QbApeBL2TMC8ww4iby5N7fOD33tMRxudgaBSpiAUzJYgl7ZFoD2VAS7 pzjf2GkVQ0dhcVhz4NVdIBaoDdGBxgFIr/oUG3uo2ePLn0+/vv37+PPr38+/v///AAYo4P+A BBZo4IEIJqjgggw26OCDEEYo4YQUVmjhhRhO8MsA1ElwDnHgOSHAAQgpBMBBSZym4oosqlhF izCueM2KBkiS4Y0YeGXcLkkA5MRRQIqD0D0I+HJRVBBJFM178GE1UGY4RrmQV7wRhoSPxXlA XjjLFGOiBAkcIOaIjlEg5gEjHtBhBWGiKWZzUuLI2I8TLHcEH06kl0ECwoVT5gR9FHTBUwHY mMF5Ar0WZ5SiGWDnABoWRppTUf2kDpRssginBGjGyOI8Gq2o56IWMmYHieEIUIAeWIZTFWxe HYrcFnoGFJUdgDilKKkZioZOkQ19SECeH2xplBJ6IgqdLvBtoOygrrxeaGp3fZYG4gBVYsBn jw2kpQSm0gRAwLigjTduRwSsScFG5wYwarQS+pqOOa2Wdu6956aR6xaKequEIoHSOqgS9lIm VFqfTRNRRxIlBq+C8loAbI8ghnglQpiuSqwEDBTgscdrfizyyCMz0DHJKBew6cMst+zyyzDH HJ1ZNNds8810maxzXTirK/PPQAct9NBEF2300UgnrfTSTNcSAQA7 --------------5E59B8D9A1D38A13A48D2A24 Content-Type: image/gif Content-ID: Content-Disposition: inline; filename="C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\nsmailAP.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODlhDAALAJEAABwcHB0dHf///wAAACH5BAAAAAAALAAAAAAMAAsAAAIcjHGoqR0OBHxL UqZsFLx3gyHWc4kLpJ1nyQJNAQA7 --------------5E59B8D9A1D38A13A48D2A24 Content-Type: image/gif Content-ID: Content-Disposition: inline; filename="C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\nsmailPD.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 R0lGODlhTgASAPcAAHKhzuzt7FdXls3W3hQUauTj4unp6uLi4sDO2+Pi4eTj4RkZc7HG2Xym 0MjT3YGp0eDg4mWYzMbR3aW/16SkwLu7zPLx8NTa31yTytTZ35661djZ3rS1yVSOye3t597e 4e7p5GlpoMDA0GydzfDw6oKDrUFBijIzgvHs5V6UymSYywAAU2iazL3N2+/u6WNjnOPj55Kz 1LnK2u7p4/Pz6/Dq5Nze4Ojn5dLZ3ioqfPTx5qzC2Do6hnJzpt3e3yYmfVWPyWKXzFqTypma uvDw7tLS2Za11e7u7I+x0+zs6O7q5ezo49nd4Obn5ejk4+Xl6Iqv0vv79AYFWvT07tTV2qO9 18nT3fDq4+Xk4uDi4bXI2nikz11dmVGOyezn4+fm4nh4qGKXyqvB2KrA2GCVyuTi4rTG2maY zOfp5pCy1OTl5l6UzOLk4wAAS1yUytzg4a/E2YqKsqG71+nq5ujo5HZ2pxAQX3CfzmGWy66v xvP07+3o5H59rOfn5kqIyNfc309Okc3O1r/N3MnK1X19q5GRtqG815i21aipwvP08O3v6OXm 5OTk4d7g4uDf4cLQ3GCVzC4ugLKxx6+wx5u41ZeYuo+PtmCWzFeQyklJjgwMYgoKV+Hi4t/h 4eDg4eDg4Ofl49/g4erm49/g4N7g4OLh4WOXzPT08Onm4uXl4+vr5+Hj4uvn4+rn4+jm4/T0 8enm4+Dh4Onp5+fk4ufl4meazFmSyeHi46fA197g4ebk4lqSyfb28mOYzOvm41+Wy/Pz7ezn 5Ojn4uDi4vb28VmSyvX18PT18XNzpcjJ0iEgdMnM1WCWydDQ10ZGjejm4nBwpeDh5ezs5+vm 4qfB2M/X4J+fvfX18dDX3+vr7JubvPHx6/Dw6b/Az3+ArsXG08/P2LzL2qi/18/Q2JO01ZO1 0zg6iGuczeHg4dvc39XV3Ht6qpWWuba3y3Bwo8PE0enn48TQ3H6o0Haiz+7q44+RtIet0t3d 4O3q5O/v6Xt9ql9fmm5uo+Dh4eHh4WaZzCH5BAAAAAAALAAAAABOABIAAAj/AP356yewn8GB AhMOPOiPFA4H4eDIOXSImpVQoLzM8oSQoMeCHw8yXKiwYEKPBjkx7Mdp2MlO/RKA+iLKCytW okDRUqAAFKxWHx5RuvPrgRkbKLDAVNlRpEmEAjk9ZUqSoNSCV0/6K/MMBAhGGaxIQNACgQNs H3zVaDVrVRlRKHTFe+Dn3CEbIDqZJBi1o9aPC0eSrOqPk1ROM2kxgZNmSy08KTAI2YUhheUg DSgJ6ucKVYIErbxIgAQkghkvpUY65VsysGu/T0XaxCFuCwZMQDqkOAfgQRoNE8Qw0LKj3Dw8 /6CEKzBDQa4af2pB6qBhBsuooRwNK0XKIMFPsQ58//LUL9QnUqNIfUr56bzK8p9CdVIAYkAM PEDcdFDxwBACHJyAgMIVV+iQCgIaQPEAABHs0kEDWqDixRsgxINBBMU84gVM/kDAzTFEAHPK HI74w4ger2zzCjCxbHPKFKdco0cfH6SSyCnAcOQPMMcAo8ssaZhSTBAp/LMDE6uAsIcrZRwQ CifTUGLKbSmQYco/tUQABBD/IOBLP6jMQwYkd4BygD+pBIAIDznw8IIIc8yhhj45tEmILHFw AQYXmUCzQT7L7BPCOqoUsAoyXNQBygNAqKCCLTEoIAwtZXRiGF9fiNNFL/906ikeKsSwgwZG vJFAmGRE8A8OtCxiACArnP9AhQibVMLLIARIgQwEJRCwwS3KtMGPNlIs0MQ2hKwgBQVTSDOJ HXnA0QELGE6ghALX8aVSKQmEcaWnnZrCwgAoLLFEMD7gYwUGZ4hrQxlHhNCGCUf0YYEzyTxB wArsEKMKFSFsoMYCKxRhQCRtBEKMNwT/IAsNeTjTxzxB/JMCEigcABhKpXRSJLidYoBxJ3qV gsI9I+BRi8g1LFKEFFI0o4onbIBDRA8r5EDEmT5QccM3KyyQzTgrKCPLHCe8Q3AliXjzwjYs hOvAEgKtokBhWrlixH4g/4OHICCAIsoBO7CQAgtr/DNKGSR4E2sTjPgTigeLRLICH3o0EhMd isT/ETQgmrwAwzYi5HDLEG0s8AQXhdCwBST/mPLHLHrZcAFzTPZDcgIF2JMCJhiQEcS3KWwB RQNBXJiCLSM4QAsERAiwAiCqMNJJAh5QQbA1Lui1ygH5wPqCJJFoUogFQ2SSRBM/tOENIBV4 0EKjzIyBQi4FjCKDBjsM4AQKKMwAzx4oDDABFFvcMULU/5BRZQQpAHEHLliwohcJL6xgjgEF 9KPIARsgWBxOcY9UuOADBshVO6KgDmUtrgTAoIEkpLACExBhFXswBBDSlgEl3K4AA6hC+hpg BDHIoAUSwAYO4jEGJGwhAo4yxSUo8wAt+AAEutCLP+bQDmXlIREWeAEY/ywguwXA4BVq4MEk NhC0D7zCEomLBg8qsA1/3GsF/OCFIxKwBwYEAQimcEArYHEAWmABhFV4QC/ch4FdUCYFvxCd KVQAgDQwgAlfoAUo9PKRJEADZidQhgkK4AEf/EAKBOCBMpDxgRMgsg4C2MQCAhGHTRBCFbHI xzvsQAEacKQTe/hDDFTgByRUYwb0AIWJYFGDYKTDCjKAww4mMIEdMCAcDvjDHkCAijKwxioE WQURulECd1AgAKkYBRoMQIF11CEZiajAECogiXpYogIB4IY2EIEIR6ziEx7gQDrYYJIv1OAC uLgDJuQBBxwIIyc8EdsS9qAEAl1hD0uAhSp1yGQS77DGH5/IxxSMQYMsCKQTBaCBMZr1ATTQ IB/boMFDV0GKiLrgPZ8gARv86ZGfYOEPDIgBOeSgBUFIoBp/eENh/EkYlbxHIVnxxCdGQR6R yHQ9A/GETvsxnoGgQ6cm8YRU+hEQADs= --------------5E59B8D9A1D38A13A48D2A24-- --------------326BB7C3C1062305EA9945E7-- From sentto-327560-7844-1054501901-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 17:15:47 2003 Received: from n20.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n20.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.76]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id RAA02253 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:15:47 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7844-1054501901-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.196] by n20.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:11:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 95438 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 21:11:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 21:11:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.71) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 21:11:39 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: brscomm@attbi.com Received: from [66.218.67.178] by n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 21:11:39 -0000 X-Sender: brscomm@attbi.com X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 5823 invoked from network); 31 May 2003 23:40:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 31 May 2003 23:40:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO rwcrmhc11.attbi.com) (204.127.198.35) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 May 2003 23:40:00 -0000 Received: from hannah (h0007e9b116c9.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.91.111.34](untrusted sender)) by attbi.com (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id <20030531233959013000091oe> (Authid: brscomm@attbi.com); Sat, 31 May 2003 23:39:59 +0000 To: Message-ID: <000e01c327cd$f349b9e0$0200a8c0@Hannah> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 In-Reply-To: <3ED65E3D.3B4139A8@bellsouth.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal From: "Bill Smith" X-Yahoo-Profile: brscomm X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 21:11:38 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 19:39:55 -0400 Subject: RE: [NEXTEL-1] The New Official Telecom Acronyms Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FCC Friendly Candy Company (Telcordia August 1999 San Francisco Wireless Basics August 1999???????? This was a favorite of the 11 meter crowd back in the heyday of CB in the early 70's. Occasionally referred to as Fred's Candy Company.. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Sun Jun 1 17:56:25 2003 Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (nwkea-mail-1.sun.com [192.18.42.13]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03192 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:56:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM ([129.146.1.45]) by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h51LpQ4Z011662; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 14:51:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (sunroof.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.168.88]) by engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h51LpJNn009855; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 14:51:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h51LqfTX025440; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 14:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0/Submit) id h51LqfOK025439; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 14:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM (engmail2sun [129.144.134.19]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h51LqcTX025432 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 14:52:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.42.14]) by engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h51Louuc010230 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 14:50:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [192.44.77.17]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h51LohLv008425 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 14:50:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id h51Loca04957; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 23:50:38 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h51Lodof063979; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 23:50:39 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200306012150.h51Lodof063979@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: jzhang@elmic.com cc: mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Subject: Re: [mobile-ip] IKE question: How should HA know the 'if interface=tunnel interface...' In-reply-to: Your message of Sun, 01 Jun 2003 08:02:20 PDT. <000001c3284e$cda7eb40$0300a8c0@riverside> Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 23:50:39 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Sender: owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Owner: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: In your previous mail you wrote: However, how should HA know the interface part "IF interface = IPv6 tunnel from home_address_1"? => we (authors) had a long discussion about the "interface" issue but with no conclusion because according to the RFC 2401, SPDs are per interfaces... Fortunately this part of the document is only an example, the mandatory specification is the packet layouts and the behaviors, so it is not critical to get a perfect wording here (but if you have suggestions...). Regards Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr From sentto-327560-7850-1054505891-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 18:18:48 2003 Received: from n40.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n40.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.108]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA04995 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:18:47 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7850-1054505891-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.66.96] by n40.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 1907 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:18:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:18:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.71) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:18:10 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.66.142] by n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:10 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 46835 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:16:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:16:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf41bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.144) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:16:25 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.158.78.82]) by imf41bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030601221839.VJQA16509.imf41bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:18:39 -0400 Message-ID: <3ED9299B.E824B2FA@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:07 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 18:15:55 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Cell Phones in Cars Lose Calif. Vote Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cell Phones in Cars Lose Calif. Vote Assemblyman Wants to Ban Hand-Held Devices on the Road By Rene Sanchez Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, May 31, 2003; Page A07 LOS ANGELES May 30 Californians have learned to live with sudden jolts from earthquakes. They gave up smoking indoors without much grief. And on the rare days here when it's not sunny, no one panics. But the next lifestyle challenge looming in the Golden State could prove to be more daunting. Its great multitude of motorists, who consider their cars a second home, soon may be forced to give up holding cell phones while at the wheel. The California Assembly has just approved a bill that would require all drivers in the state to use hands-free devices such as earplugs and headsets whenever they use cell phones, or get fined. The measure still must be passed by the state Senate and signed into law by Gov. Gray Davis (D), but legislators say both steps appear likely. Only one other state, New York, restricts cell phone use on the road. But the habit, which law enforcement officials say is ever more common and often dangerous, has become the focus of growing national debate. Several dozen other states are considering similar bans. "This bill will save lives -- it's that simple," said Joseph Simitian, the Democratic assemblyman who sponsored the legislation. "The burden is negligible and the benefits are significant." Prying phones from the hands of most California drivers -- there are 30 million vehicles registered in the state -- could take a while. Its crowded freeways are swarmed with chatting motorists steering with one hand. But last year a study by the state's highway patrol concluded that cell phones are the leading cause of driver inattention to the road. The study, which examined every vehicle collision in California during the first half of last year, found that 5,677 accidents were the result of distracted driving. More than 600 of those crashes involved motorists talking on cell phones, the study said, and led to six deaths and 264 injuries. For that reason, California Highway Patrol Commissioner Spike Helmick is expressing support for the bill. "You've got a bunch of people out there not paying attention to the highway, and they need to be," said Anne DaVigo, a Highway Patrol spokeswoman. The measure, which passed mostly with the support of Democratic lawmakers, still faces opposition. Several cell phone companies are lobbying against its passage. Many Republicans in the California legislature also are denouncing the step as excessive government regulation or questioning why only cell phones and not other bad habits of motorists -- such as eating fast food, drinking coffee or applying makeup -- are not also being subject to specific punishments. Others are complaining that the Highway Patrol's recent assessment of accidents attributed to cell phones did not specify whether the motorists involved had been holding phones or using hands-free devices. National studies on the subject are mixed. Some have concluded that accidents are far more likely to occur among motorists holding cell phones, but others say tuning a radio while driving is just as dangerous. In dueling floor demonstrations before Thursday's vote on the bill, some lawmakers tried to show either how difficult or easy it is to hold a cell phone against their ear and look around. If the bill wins final approval, beginning in 2005 California motorists caught holding a cell phone while driving would be fined $20 for a first offense and $50 for subsequent violations, which is inexpensive compared with penalties for the same crime in New York. Fines there start at $100 and can reach $500. Police, firefighters and emergency medical workers in California would be exempt from the cell phone restrictions. Simitian and other California lawmakers had been campaigning for past two years for the measure without success. But they have won growing public support in recent months. Talking on a cell phone while steering a car, Simitian said, is much riskier than "taking a quick bite of a hamburger." He also scoffed at opponents of the measure, saying their arguments are no different from those raised a generation ago against seat belts. "There is a growing mountain of evidence," Simitian said, "that the way cell phones are being used in cars is a problem." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60429-2003May30.html ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7851-1054505919-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 18:19:11 2003 Received: from n6.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n6.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.90]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA05009 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:19:11 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7851-1054505919-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.66.98] by n6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 19160 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:18:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:18:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n2.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.75) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:18:38 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.189] by n2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:38 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 10186 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:13:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:13:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf41bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.145) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:13:29 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.158.78.82]) by imf41bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030601221543.VGEJ16509.imf41bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:15:43 -0400 Message-ID: <3ED928EA.B3CA1E61@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:37 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 18:12:58 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Wireless Mt. Washington Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit May 30, 2003 Wireless Mt. Washington By Gerry Blackwell The winter weather at the top of Mount Washington, the highest peak in New Hampshire and in the whole northeast United States, is, in a word, foul. On one record-breaking occasion, the wind speed measured at the Mount Washington Observatory reached 230 miles per hour. While it may be true that you can't fall off a mountain, in those conditions you could easily get blown off one. If Wi-Fi can work here, it stands to reason, it can work just about anywhere. Thanks to some canny engineering by Robert "Hobbes" Zakon, chief technology officer at Zakon Group LLC of North Conway, N.H., Wi-Fi does indeed work here. Zakon engineered a five-mile point-to-point shot using ORiNOCO (http://www.orinocowireless.com) equipment from Proxim to connect a remote Web cam to the Observatory's wired frame-relay link to the Internet. "Mount Washington is renowned for having the worst weather in the northeast," Zakon says. "The highest ground wind ever recorded in the U.S. was recorded there. It's a whole lot of weather -- snow, ice, winds. Engineering a solution was a big challenge." His firm, a consulting/engineering jack of all trades, counts wireless as one of its specialties, but only one of many. "We work mostly with advanced and emerging technologies," Zakon says. Mount Washington Observatory is a non-profit weather research station. The facility is shared by the US Forest Service and is also a tourist center in the summer. The Observatory already had some Web cams in place to show weather conditions on the mountain, but it didn't have any outside, and it didn't have any that showed a key feature: the Tuckerman Ravine on the southeast side, an area popular with spring skiers and summer hikers. A Web cam would be a boon to the hikers and skiers. "Sometimes it's snowing up there when it's a perfectly sunny day down below [in North Conway]," Zakon says. "And you get some amazing cloud cover up there." If it was properly done, if it could show enough detail, a Web cam might even be useful in helping guide rescuers to avalanche survivors. The Observatory secured a government grant to install a Web cam that would show the ravine. Observatory members who use the recreation facilities on the mountain also chipped in. Securing funds was the easy part, though. It was left up to Zakon to solve the real problems: how to provision and power a communications link 6,000 feet up a desolate mountain. The logical place to put the Web cam to get the view the Observatory wanted was across Pinkham Notch (a notch is a gap in a mountain range) at the Wildcat ski area, a seasonal facility only open in late winter and early spring. Whatever communications technology they used, it would need power. The ski area uses gasoline generators, which the Web cam station could also have used -- but only during the short skiing season. The Observatory could also have installed its own generator, but that would have meant hauling fuel up the mountain in winter, which would be impractical. That left solar or wind. Wind power involves moving parts exposed to extremely high winds which could result in damage or jamming. Zakon went with solar from SunWize Technologies of Kingston, N.Y. An affordable system couldn't be counted on to provide continuous power year round, but the communications and camera technology wouldn't need to be switched on all the time as the plan was to transmit an image only every 15 minutes. "We're not looking at people in an Internet cafe here," Zakon points out. "Things aren't going to change that fast." So the system was engineered with a photo-cell switch and timer that would switch the system on only during daylight hours for three minutes at a time every 15 minutes. That solved the power source problem. Getting a phone line to the ski area was out of the question. The ski operators use walkie-talkie-style radios for communications. While surveying the area, though, Zakon noticed that he could see the roof of the observatory from Wildcat. That meant fixed wireless was a possibility. After researching the market, he decided the best bet was standards-based 2.4 GHz -- Wi-Fi. It provided the bandwidth required to transmit high-quality images, it was inexpensive -- and going with a standards-based solution would make it easier in the future to turn the Wildcat site into a hub for a wireless network of remote stations feeding weather data. Zakon considered off-the-shelf components from Young Design Inc. (YDI) and HyperLink Technologies Inc., but in the end opted for the all-in-one-box ORiNOCO Point-to-Point Backbone Kit, built around the OR-500 Outdoor Router. (Proxim has since replaced this product with the Tsunami QuickBridge 11.) The ORiNOCO gear barely met the five-mile range requirement, but a single-vendor, pre-engineered solution was easier to sell to the Observatory, which would be maintaining the system after Zakon got it up and running. "ORiNOCO technical support said, 'Yes, it'll probably work,'" he recalls. "We didn't get the warmest fuzziest feelings from ORiNOCO." Zakon also gave careful consideration to an antenna, selecting a Yagi model from ORiNOCO in the end. It had to be directional to reduce the potential for interference with other RF activity on the mountain, including military, government and broadcast. With a parabolic antenna, there would be the possibility of ice accumulating in the dish and attenuating the signal. A whip antenna would be too prone to snapping in the wind. Placement of the antennas and radios was critical -- especially at the Wildcat end where the camera would also be placed. Zakon found an ideal spot. The ski area at one time had a gondola ski lift. The structure at the top of the mountain remained. Zakon had a custom enclosure built for the wireless, solar power and camera technology and mounted it in one of the gondola bays. At the Observatory end, he found he could mount the antenna and radio inside in a window well behind hurricane-proof glass. In the end, though, all the careful engineering amounted to best guesses as to what the equipment could withstand in the way of weather. The Observatory made the decision to go ahead and buy the equipment and test it this winter before going live. As it happened, it was a good year to test -- it was one of the worst winters in a long time. The network came through with flying colors. The camera is a Canon VC-C4 pan/tilt/zoom (PTV) model. It's controlled by a purposely-built AXIS 2401 Video Server from Axis Communications, a Swedish company, which allows an operator to control its angle of view and zoom the lens in and out over the Internet. To see output from the Wildcat Web cam, go to this page at the Mount Washington Observatory site. To learn more about the engineering project and see pictures of the technology in situ, go to this page at Zakon's site. http://boston.internet.com/news/article.php/2214541 ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7853-1054505920-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 18:19:12 2003 Received: from n6.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n6.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.90]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA05011 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:19:12 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7853-1054505920-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.197] by n6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 50618 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:18:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:18:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n12.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.67) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:18:39 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.189] by n12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:38 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 34946 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:07:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:07:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf46bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.95) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:07:47 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.158.78.82]) by imf46bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030601221001.DBGW26690.imf46bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net>; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:10:01 -0400 Message-ID: <3ED92794.17EDAB0@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" , "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" , "firerad2@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:37 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 18:07:16 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Senate OKs funds to fix NHP error Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Senate OKs funds to fix NHP error THE ASSOCIATED PRESS CARSON CITY -- The Senate has unanimously approved a late-session measure authorizing $16.5 million in spending to help fix a multimillion-dollar foul-up in building a Nevada Highway Patrol communications system. Senate Bill 499 appropriates most of the money from the state's highway fund and $1.8 million from the general fund. The lawmakers' Interim Finance Committee would have final say on how the money is spent, and some money could also go toward other state agencies' radio systems, which may face similar problems. Senators put the legislation on the fast track: It was introduced Monday and sent to the Assembly before the end of the week. The NHP could face big Federal Communications Commission fines for operating a communications system without proper federal licenses for three years. The patrol spent $14 million on a contract with Motorola to build the computer radio system to link troopers with each other, the dispatch center and other law enforcement agencies. It was activated in 2000. But no one ever applied to the FCC for licenses for the frequencies, and the FCC is asking the patrol to get off those frequencies by June 9. The error will force the highway patrol to switch to an old communications system, and could mean the agency will have to start over to build a system as fast and as capable as the one it will replace. "NEXTEL-1 IT'S NOT JUST NEXTEL" Note The New address Subscribe to Nextel-1: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL-1 "NEXTEL2 FOR iDEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS" Subscribe to Nextel2: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL2 "WIRELESS FORUM HOMELAND SECURITY GROUP" The Complete Resource for Wireless Homeland Security. Subscribe to WFHSG: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/WFHSG ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7852-1054505919-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 18:19:13 2003 Received: from n6.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n6.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.90]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA05025 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:19:12 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7852-1054505919-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.200] by n6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 74355 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:18:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:18:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n21.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.77) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:18:38 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.189] by n21.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:38 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 76043 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 21:21:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 21:21:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf45bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.148) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 21:21:50 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.158.78.82]) by imf45bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030601212405.SOCH4978.imf45bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:24:05 -0400 Message-ID: <3EDA6E50.8FD1650F@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com References: From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 22:18:37 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 17:21:20 -0400 Subject: Re: [NEXTEL-1] Coast to Coast NEXTEL Direct Connect Tonight Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It has been up for a while. Which reminds I need to publish the results from our Fl-Ca DC test. Mark wrote: > > Well I haven't seen the official announcement yet, but this evening > my wife and her sister did a direct connect from Florida to > California. The home systems for both phones are in Florida. > > Set up time was quick and there was no noticeable latency as the > conversation flowed back and forth like both users were local to each > other. > > If I have time tomorrow I'll try to get her on a landline and test > the initial set-up time between the phones. > > Mark ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7854-1054506778-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 18:33:30 2003 Received: from n7.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n7.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.91]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA05357 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:33:29 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7854-1054506778-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.201] by n7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:32:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 31531 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:32:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:32:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n15.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.70) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:32:57 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.152] by n15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:32:57 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 19207 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:27:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:27:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf46bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.94) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:27:28 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.158.78.82]) by imf46bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030601222942.DRUK26690.imf46bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:29:42 -0400 Message-ID: <3EDA7DB1.6A92424A@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 22:32:56 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 18:26:57 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Catalyst Introduces IP LinkT Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Catalyst Introduces IP LinkT Catalyst Communications Technologies, a leading provider of radio over IP solutions to the mobile radio marketplace, has introduced a next generation technology for solving Homeland Security, coordinated, and tactical interoperability problems experienced by our nation's first responders. IP LinkT allows participants to create spheres of interoperability for communications between disparate radio systems, frequencies and manufacturers, by using existing, in-place networks and simple personal computers with Catalyst IP LinkT software to patch these radios together and provide radio voice interoperability. These interoperable networks are immune to distance limitations, can be established and dissolved easily and quickly, and offer total control and rights to each of the participants. For more details, visit http://www.catcomtec.com/products/iplink Catalyst has also prepared a technology White Paper on IP network-based interoperability solutions for todays mobile radio systems: http://www.catcomtec.com/products/iplink/Interoperability%20White%20Paper.pdf ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7855-1054508124-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 18:55:59 2003 Received: from n9.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n9.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.93]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA05734 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:55:59 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7855-1054508124-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.66.94] by n9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:55:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 1590 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:55:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:55:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n5.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.89) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:55:23 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.140] by n5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jun 2003 22:55:23 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 36604 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 22:39:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jun 2003 22:39:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf46bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.94) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 22:39:39 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.158.78.82]) by imf46bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030601224153.EDCM26690.imf46bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:41:53 -0400 Message-ID: <3EDA808B.AF62B453@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Edited-By: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 01 Jun 2003 22:55:23 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 18:39:07 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] NextWave, Clarity seek pact for spectrum deals Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NextWave, Clarity seek pact for spectrum deals Fri May 30, 2003 12:17 PM ET PHILADELPHIA, May 30 (Reuters) - NextWave Telecom Inc. NXLC.PK on Friday sought bankruptcy court permission to forge a partnership with venture capital firm Clarity Partners LP to explore the purchase of up to $150 million in new wireless airwaves capable of handling new generation services. NextWave, which is in talks to sell about 20 percent of its wireless airwaves to Cingular Wireless, said it has been actively mulling the purchase of other airwaves that would complement its existing holdings, and make easier its plans to deploy a nationwide broadband wireless service. Wireless companies have been upgrading the capacity of their networks to handle new services such as wireless data and video services which can be bountiful profit-makers. NextWave, which is in bankruptcy protection and recently won a long court battle to keep the wireless licenses, said it has studied several alternatives that would allow it to efficiently use their spectrum licenses, "including selling, leasing or swapping some of their spectrum, and possibly supplementing their licenses with the acquisition of complementary spectrum." Clarity, based in Beverly Hills, California, is a private equity firm focused exclusively on investments in the communications and media industries. If the proposed partnership with Clarity is approved by the bankruptcy court, NextWave said the private equity firm would form and fund an acquisition vehicle, IPCom, to acquire spectrum suitable for the deployment of broadband wireless service. The companies aim to develop an acquisition strategy by July 31. The total sum of organizational and operational expenses of IPCom would not exceed $150 million. NextWave would pay Clarity an initial work fee of $1 million, NextWave said in a filing with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. NextWave, meanwhile, continues talks to sell some of its wireless spectrum to Cingular, the No. 2 wireless carrier behind Verizon Wireless, for about $1.5 billion in cash, sources close to the talks said. A deal could come as early as next week, the sources said. NextWave would maintain spectrum with nationwide coverage, but would provide Cingular a slice of airwaves, the source said. Cingular is a joint venture of BellSouth Corp. BLS.N and SBC Communications Inc. SBC.N http://reuters.com/financeNewsArticle.jhtml type=governmentFilingsNews&storyID=2852794 -- "NEXTEL-1 IT'S NOT JUST NEXTEL" Note The New address Subscribe to Nextel-1: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL-1 "NEXTEL2 FOR iDEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS" Subscribe to Nextel2: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL2 "WIRELESS FORUM HOMELAND SECURITY GROUP" The Complete Resource for Wireless Homeland Security. Subscribe to WFHSG: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/WFHSG ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Sun Jun 1 19:47:33 2003 Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (nwkea-mail-2.sun.com [192.18.42.14]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA06493 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 19:47:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM ([129.144.134.19]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h51Nh6Lv006015; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:43:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (sunroof.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.168.88]) by engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h51Nghui027588; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:43:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h51Ni5TX025861; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:44:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0/Submit) id h51Ni5Fe025860; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:44:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM (engmail1mpk [129.146.1.45]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h51Ni2TX025853 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:44:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.42.14]) by engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h51NgLNh026515 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:42:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ALPHA9.ITS.MONASH.EDU.AU (alpha9.its.monash.edu.au [130.194.1.9]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h51NgFLv005742 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:42:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kapow.its.monash.edu.au ([130.194.1.71]) by vaxh.its.monash.edu.au (PMDF V5.2-31 #39306) with ESMTP id <01KWM4E3Q2L49B4NVL@vaxh.its.monash.edu.au> for mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com; Mon, 2 Jun 2003 09:27:03 +1000 Received: from kapow.its.monash.edu.au (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F8020009; Mon, 02 Jun 2003 09:27:02 +1000 (EST) Received: from eng.monash.edu.au (knuth.eng.monash.edu.au [130.194.252.110]) by kapow.its.monash.edu.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FEAE20008; Mon, 02 Jun 2003 09:27:02 +1000 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 09:27:02 +1000 From: Greg Daley Subject: Re: [mobile-ip] [Announce] Link Identifier draft. To: Ed Remmell Cc: Brett Pentland , mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com, JinHyeock Choi Reply-to: greg.daley@eng.monash.edu.au Message-id: <3EDA8BC6.3020303@eng.monash.edu.au> Organization: Monash University MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020529 X-Accept-Language: en, en-us References: Sender: owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Owner: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hi Ed, Ed Remmell wrote: > Brett - > > Personally, I think this new option is a bad idea, since it gives little > extra payback for an increase both in complexity and administrative support. > I don't understand why the MN needs to be aware of multiple routers when it > is away from home, it can just use a single current default router > advertising a global prefix to configure its primary care-of address. This > is simpler, since it is easier to track reachability (both from the router, > as well as bi-directional reachability) of a single router. When the MN > moves from that router to a different router, it most likely needs to select > a new primary CoA and perform a L3 handover, unless the new router > advertises the same global prefix. > > The R-bit option (global scope router address) works perfectly fine in this > case to disambiguate between routers, assuming duplication of link-local > scope addresses if the routers are on different links. If two routers on the same link advertise R bits, (possibly with different prefixes, as is allowed by RFC-2461), how do you know if the current router is still available? --> You have to check, or guess. In movement detection it is not the fact that there are multiple routers on a link which means that this check has to be done, it is the possibility of this being the case. This means that movement cannot be detected reliably by receiving a single new RA, unless there is some topology restriction (single router only) or there is additional information in the new RA. With a LinkID, the MN knows immediately if its current router is on the same link, or if movement has occurred, without signalling to the old AR. I know this is _very_ simple to achieve in the MN. > > In section 9.1 you say: > " This document describes a mechanism by which reception of an RA is > used by nodes to de-configure the current default router (and associ- > ated on-link addresses associated with this router). Additionally, > in many environments, movement detection is used as an instigator for > configuration signaling." > > I'd say in response that whenever the MN switches to a new current default > router when operating away from home, this is likely an indicator that it > has switched to a new link (not always, but it is safe to assume so - note > that MIPL defaults to using eager cell switching for movement detection, and > this algorithm does not work well when there are multiple routers on the > link, so I think for your typical MIPv6 deployment scenario, given the > popularity of embedded Linux, you will only have a single default router on > any given link), in which case it should purge all dynamically discovered > entries (including Neighbor Cache entries, on-link prefixes, etc.) from its > routing tree or the equivalent. This goes back into 'likely' indicators, upon reception of RAs from routers we haven't seen. Additionally, it is not safe to assume that networks will be configured well, nor that they conform to a single router per link. This is unlikely to be a deployment in any serious ISP's network. Topology restriction is not an attractive alternative (certainly not because of a single implementation). LinkID's specify a strong mechanism for determining movement. There is no guesswork. Greg From owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Sun Jun 1 19:53:30 2003 Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com (brmea-mail-3.Sun.COM [192.18.98.34]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA06625 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 19:53:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM ([129.146.1.45]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h51NpOep016533; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:51:24 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (sunroof.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.168.88]) by engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h51NpFNn028099; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:51:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h51NqbTX026059; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:52:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0/Submit) id h51NqbrH026058; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:52:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM (engmail2sun [129.144.134.19]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h51NqXTX026051 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com (brmea-mail-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.5.31]) by engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h51Noluc028820 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 16:50:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ALPHA9.ITS.MONASH.EDU.AU (alpha9.its.monash.edu.au [130.194.1.9]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h51Noe3K016190 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 17:50:42 -0600 (MDT) Received: from kapow.its.monash.edu.au ([130.194.1.71]) by vaxh.its.monash.edu.au (PMDF V5.2-31 #39306) with ESMTP id <01KWM4VPB46W9B4A3O@vaxh.its.monash.edu.au> for mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com; Mon, 2 Jun 2003 09:41:14 +1000 Received: from kapow.its.monash.edu.au (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FFAC2000F; Mon, 02 Jun 2003 09:41:13 +1000 (EST) Received: from monash.edu (brettpc.eng.monash.edu.au [130.194.252.100]) by kapow.its.monash.edu.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE9F02001D; Mon, 02 Jun 2003 09:41:01 +1000 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 09:41:01 +1000 From: Brett Pentland Subject: Re: [mobile-ip] [Announce] Link Identifier draft. In-reply-to: <3EDA8BC6.3020303@eng.monash.edu.au> To: greg.daley@eng.monash.edu.au Cc: Ed Remmell , mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com, JinHyeock Choi Message-id: <3EDA8F0D.50209@monash.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030425 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en References: <3EDA8BC6.3020303@eng.monash.edu.au> Sender: owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Owner: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Hi Ed, Thanks for taking the time to have a look. I think Greg covered the details. I just wanted to reiterate that the purpose of LinkID is simply to allow an MN to rapidly determine whether a received RA advertising a different set of prefixes to the current default router actually represents an advertisement from a new link or just from another router on the same link. Cheers, Brett. Greg Daley wrote: > Hi Ed, > > Ed Remmell wrote: > >> Brett - >> >> Personally, I think this new option is a bad idea, since it gives little >> extra payback for an increase both in complexity and administrative >> support. >> I don't understand why the MN needs to be aware of multiple routers >> when it >> is away from home, it can just use a single current default router >> advertising a global prefix to configure its primary care-of address. >> This >> is simpler, since it is easier to track reachability (both from the >> router, >> as well as bi-directional reachability) of a single router. When the MN >> moves from that router to a different router, it most likely needs to >> select >> a new primary CoA and perform a L3 handover, unless the new router >> advertises the same global prefix. >> >> The R-bit option (global scope router address) works perfectly fine in >> this >> case to disambiguate between routers, assuming duplication of link-local >> scope addresses if the routers are on different links. > > > If two routers on the same link advertise R bits, > (possibly with different prefixes, as is allowed by RFC-2461), > how do you know if the current router is still available? > > --> You have to check, or guess. > > In movement detection it is not the fact that there are multiple > routers on a link which means that this check has to be done, it > is the possibility of this being the case. > > This means that movement cannot be detected reliably by receiving > a single new RA, unless there is some topology restriction (single > router only) or there is additional information in the new RA. > > With a LinkID, the MN knows immediately if its current router is > on the same link, or if movement has occurred, without signalling to > the old AR. I know this is _very_ simple to achieve in the MN. > >> >> In section 9.1 you say: >> " This document describes a mechanism by which reception of an RA is >> used by nodes to de-configure the current default router (and associ- >> ated on-link addresses associated with this router). Additionally, >> in many environments, movement detection is used as an instigator for >> configuration signaling." >> >> I'd say in response that whenever the MN switches to a new current >> default >> router when operating away from home, this is likely an indicator that it >> has switched to a new link (not always, but it is safe to assume so - >> note >> that MIPL defaults to using eager cell switching for movement >> detection, and >> this algorithm does not work well when there are multiple routers on the >> link, so I think for your typical MIPv6 deployment scenario, given the >> popularity of embedded Linux, you will only have a single default >> router on >> any given link), in which case it should purge all dynamically discovered >> entries (including Neighbor Cache entries, on-link prefixes, etc.) >> from its >> routing tree or the equivalent. > > > This goes back into 'likely' indicators, upon > reception of RAs from routers we haven't seen. > Additionally, it is not safe to assume that > networks will be configured well, nor that they > conform to a single router per link. This is > unlikely to be a deployment in any serious > ISP's network. > > Topology restriction is not an attractive alternative > (certainly not because of a single implementation). > > LinkID's specify a strong mechanism for determining > movement. There is no guesswork. > > Greg > -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Brett Pentland brett.pentland@monash.edu CTIE - Centre for Telecommunications and Information Engineering Department of Electrical and Computer Systems Engineering Monash University, VIC, 3800, Australia Phone : +61 3 9905-5245 Fax : +61 3 9905-5358 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From sentto-327560-7856-1054516747-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Sun Jun 1 21:19:40 2003 Received: from n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.78]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id VAA08089 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 21:19:39 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7856-1054516747-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.199] by n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jun 2003 01:19:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 27473 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2003 01:19:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jun 2003 01:19:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n20.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.76) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2003 01:19:06 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.66.141] by n20.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jun 2003 01:19:06 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 42133 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2003 01:16:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jun 2003 01:16:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf25bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.199) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2003 01:16:35 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.154.50.243]) by imf25bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030602011849.RWJU1331.imf25bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net>; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 21:18:49 -0400 Message-ID: <3EDAA553.70360091@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: WFHSG , "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 02 Jun 2003 01:19:03 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 21:16:03 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Former engineer at Sanmina SCI pleads guilty to taking Publice Saftey Radios. Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Man pleads guilty to taking radios By Bill Freehling Lynchburg News and Advance Wednesday, May 21, 2003 A former engineer at Sanmina SCI who sold eight stolen emergency communication radios to the Lynchburg Fire and EMS Department pleaded guilty Tuesday in Lynchburg Circuit Court to unlawfully taking property. Allan Frank Johnson, 43, of 1441 Nelson Drive, worked at Sanmina for at least seven years before being laid off in August 2001, said Chief Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney Mike Doucette. Doucette said Johnson took the Ericsson MRK portable radios - which are similar to those used by police, fire and rescue crews in the city and counties - from Sanmina and then programmed them to be compatible on the regional emergency radio system. In September 2001, Johnson sold the fire department eight radios for $5,200. When new, Doucette said, the radios are worth about $3,400 each. In an earlier interview, Lynchburg Fire Chief Buddy Martinette said the department thought it was buying legitimate radios. He took responsibility for not making calls to find out how Johnson got the equipment, however. In January 2002, Lynchburg police searched Johnson's residence. They found equipment including computer software, manuals, computers, radios and radio parts belonging to Ericsson and Sanmina. Gregory Scott Simms, a former Lynchburg firefighter, led investigators to Johnson after Simms was caught stealing radios from Sanmina. Simms, who worked part time as an emergency medical technician at Sanmina, told investigators he took radios to Johnson to be programmed. Simms resigned from the fire department after he was arrested and charged with grand larceny on Dec. 17, 2001. Last May, Simms accepted a plea agreement that reduced the charge to unlawfully taking property, a misdemeanor. He agreed to cooperate in the case against Johnson, which Doucette said Simms has now done. Simms' sentencing is scheduled for Friday. At that time, he will be convicted of the misdemeanor and sentenced to six months in jail, all suspended. Johnson had faced two felony counts of embezzlement - one for the radios, one for the software used to program the radios. A conviction could have resulted in 40 years in prison. Instead, Johnson agreed to a similar deal that Simms got - a misdemeanor conviction and six months in jail, all suspended. Circuit Court Judge J. Leyburn Mosby Jr. accepted the agreement Tuesday, calling it "compatible with the public interest and appropriate with the facts of the case." Doucette said he offered Johnson and his defense attorney, Joseph Sanzone, the agreement because of several factors. Two key witnesses had moved, making a difficult case even harder. It was possible that Johnson got the software from outside the company. And Doucette also said it was hard to tell whether some Sanmina employees were at times given radios for personal use. "The bottom line is that the defendant took advantage of an atmosphere where some employees viewed the company's property as their own," Doucette said in a statement. "The defendant took it to a higher level. Instead of taking one radio home for his personal use, he took many." Doucette, who said he did not "easily enter into this agreement," also cited that Johnson had no criminal record, and that the deal was similar to that received by Simms. But he added that Johnson's actions were still wrong. "While an employee at Ericsson/SCI," Doucette said in his statement, "the defendant was faced with a character test, and he failed the test. Today he publicly received his report card." http://www.newsadvance.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=LNA%2FMGArticle%2FLNA_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031769622575&path=!f -- "NEXTEL-1 IT'S NOT JUST NEXTEL" Note The New address Subscribe to Nextel-1: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL-1 "NEXTEL2 FOR iDEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS" Subscribe to Nextel2: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL2 "WIRELESS FORUM HOMELAND SECURITY GROUP" The Complete Resource for Wireless Homeland Security. Subscribe to WFHSG: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/WFHSG ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Sun Jun 1 22:03:45 2003 Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com (brmea-mail-3.Sun.COM [192.18.98.34]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA09185 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 22:03:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM ([129.144.134.19]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5222Dep023022; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 20:02:14 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (sunroof.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.168.88]) by engmail2sun.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h5221sui015467; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 19:02:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h5223GTX026551; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 19:03:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0/Submit) id h5223G0c026550; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 19:03:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM (engmail1mpk [129.146.1.45]) by sunroof.eng.sun.com (8.12.10.Beta0+Sun/8.12.10.Beta0) with ESMTP id h5223CTX026543 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 19:03:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com (brmea-mail-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.5.31]) by engmail1mpk.Eng.Sun.COM (8.12.9+Sun/8.12.9/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h5221VNh018592 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 19:01:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gcis.net (64-132-170-33.gen.twtelecom.net [64.132.170.33]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5221O3K015141 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 20:01:24 -0600 (MDT) Received: from winMe [12.99.240.208] by smtp.gcis.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.07) id A02A52300EC; Sun, 01 Jun 2003 22:02:18 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Jimmy Zhang" To: Cc: Subject: RE: [mobile-ip] IKE question: How should HA know the 'if interface=tunnel interface...' Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:59:52 -0700 Message-ID: <000c01c328aa$ac936cc0$0300a8c0@riverside> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200306012150.h51Lodof063979@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. Sender: owner-mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Owner: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yes, according to RFC 2401, SPDs are per interface, however, that is REAL interface. It is very natural to have different SPDs on different interfaces because you are going to send & receive on different interface too. If you send/receive packet on interface 1, you must use SPD of interface 1; if you send/receive packet on interface 2, you must use SPD of interface 2. I don't think RFC 2401 allows us to send/receive packet on interface 1, however apply the SPD of interface 2. 'SPDs are per interface' is true, I think, only when you send/receive per interface. If you send/receive on the same interface, but want to apply different SPDs, the peer has no way to determine which interface you are talking about, given the current IKE message exchanges. Here our situation is that, we are going to send/receive packet on home agent's one same interface (the interface IKE runs on), however, sometimes we need apply the real interface SPD, such as the policy to protect BU and BA, and sometimes we need apply the virtual interface SPD such as the policy to protect HOTI and HOT, IMHO, IKEv1 just doesn't have that luxury to tell which is which. The only information IKE phase 2 responder knows are source address/source port, destination address/destination port, protocol, there is no interface. This question is not perfect wording or not, but doable or not doable. We should at least add one notify payload to IKEv1. The purpose of this notify payload is to let the peer know that 'this SA proposal is not for the interface on which you receive this negotiation, but some interface else, please query your SPD of that interface before you reject me'. We extend the idea of proxy negotiation here to include proxy service for another interface. When the peer receives this notification, it knows that it should query the SPD of that mentioned interface, and then process the SA proposal accordingly. Proxy service for different interfaces is maybe useful for IPsec/IKE itself too, especially for router which may have multiple SPDs for multiple interfaces. Just my wide ideas, with best regards, Jimmy > -----Original Message----- > From: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr > [mailto:Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr] > Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 2:51 PM > To: jzhang@elmic.com > Cc: mobile-ip@sunroof.eng.sun.com > Subject: Re: [mobile-ip] IKE question: How should HA know the > 'if interface=tunnel interface...' > > > In your previous mail you wrote: > > However, how should HA know the interface part "IF interface = IPv6 > tunnel from home_address_1"? > > => we (authors) had a long discussion about the "interface" > issue but with no conclusion because according to the RFC > 2401, SPDs are per interfaces... Fortunately this part of the > document is only an example, the mandatory specification is > the packet layouts and the behaviors, so it is not critical > to get a perfect wording here (but if you have suggestions...). > > Regards > > Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr > From sentto-327560-7858-1054528439-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Mon Jun 2 00:34:31 2003 Received: from n12.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n12.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.67]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA11566 for ; Mon, 2 Jun 2003 00:34:30 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7858-1054528439-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.66.97] by n12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jun 2003 04:34:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 32163 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2003 04:33:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jun 2003 04:33:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.73) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2003 04:33:58 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.177] by n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jun 2003 04:33:58 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 24451 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2003 03:52:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jun 2003 03:52:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf47bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.151) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2003 03:52:46 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.158.65.7]) by imf47bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030602035500.EILR2907.imf47bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 23:55:00 -0400 Message-ID: <3EDAC9EA.99B7E0DA@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 02 Jun 2003 04:33:58 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 23:52:10 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Nextel Customer Gets Run Around- Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Q: I purchased a Nextel Communications phone in December over the phone. I was going to Florida for two weeks and they said they could send the phone down there. I said OK. They said I just had to call FedEx after we finish the transaction and have them forward the phone to Florida. When I called FedEx, the person said that there was absolutely no way they could do that, and that Nextel would have to ship it there. So right now I'm thinking, "Oh crap." So I call Nextel back and tell them what FedEx said, and they go, "Well, we can't do anything about it, sir." She said I had to start the new phone in my local coverage area. So there was no way I could have started it down in Florida. So since the first guy blatantly lied to me and I couldn't use the phone down in Florida anyway, I told them to cancel it. After about 10 minutes of telling her to cancel it, and her saying she can't, my mother got on the phone and TOLD them that they were going to cancel it. She goes OK, but the phone is already shipped. "Already shipped!" I said. "I just called you back five minutes after I placed the order!" She said, "Just refuse shipment and the $250 will be credited back to your card." So here I am now. After about 10 to 15 phone calls to Nextel, they have finally only credited me $150. They say the same thing every time: "We sent a request for refund and you should have it in 10 to 14 days." This company has given me the biggest run-around, and has probably affected my credit. That's great too, seeing that I'm only 19, and I have minimal credit as it is. --K.B., Elkhart A: Here's Nextel's response: "The complaint that was sent to you by Mr. K.B. was resolved. Mr. B. was contacted and is satisfied with the resolution by Nextel." That's it? What a letdown! Where's the drama? Where's the intrigue? Where's your mom? We've got a local electronics store worker who needs a talking-to. Oh, well. Here's your money. We assume that's enough of a happy ending. Carol Elliott's Action Line column appears on Sundays and Tuesdays. If you have a consumer complaint or inquiry, contact Action Line via e-mail at actionline@sbtinfo.com; by letter at The South Bend Tribune, South Bend, IN 46626; or by fax at (574) 236-1765. Sorry, we can't accept requests by phone. http://hoovnews.hoovers.com/fp.asp?layout=query_displaynews&q=NEXTEL&so=&dc=&ro=&ed=&sd=&s=1&boldtext=NEXTEL&sym=&doc_id=NR200306011180.3_612a00153acb85c7 -- "NEXTEL-1 IT'S NOT JUST NEXTEL" Note The New address Subscribe to Nextel-1: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL-1 "NEXTEL2 FOR iDEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS" Subscribe to Nextel2: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL2 "WIRELESS FORUM HOMELAND SECURITY GROUP" The Complete Resource for Wireless Homeland Security. Subscribe to WFHSG: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/WFHSG ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7857-1054528439-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Mon Jun 2 00:34:32 2003 Received: from n37.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n37.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.105]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA11580 for ; Mon, 2 Jun 2003 00:34:32 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7857-1054528439-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.198] by n37.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jun 2003 04:34:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 34697 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2003 04:33:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jun 2003 04:33:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.73) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2003 04:33:58 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.177] by n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jun 2003 04:33:58 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 68114 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2003 02:24:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jun 2003 02:24:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf37bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.140) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2003 02:24:26 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.154.50.243]) by imf37bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030602022640.RFPI10203.imf37bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 22:26:40 -0400 Message-ID: <3EDAB53A.FDBB0235@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 02 Jun 2003 04:33:58 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 22:23:54 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] Palm to add Net phoning to Wi-Fi device Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sunday, June 01, 2003 Palm to add Net phoning to Wi-Fi device The handheld maker is working with partners to add voice over IP and security software to its Tungsten C device, which features built-in Wi-Fi. Handheld market share leader Palm is teaming with software developers to make its Wi-Fi device more attractive to consumers and businesses. The Milpitas, Calif.-based company announced Thursday that it is joining with several partners to make more services available on its Tungsten C handheld, which comes with built-in Wi-Fi support. Palm is looking to add Net-phoning capabilities to the Tungsten C as well as additional security and the ability to more easily identify and use hot spots--areas where wireless Internet access is available through Wi-Fi. With the partnership, Palm joins others in the hardware business that are teaming with software companies in an attempt to expand the usefulness of Wi-Fi. "We want to move beyond the ability to sync remotely," said Paul Osborne, a senior product manager for Palm. "We're looking to expand the number of applications on the device…we're taking advantage of what's available." The Tungsten C is Palm's first handheld with Wi-Fi built in. The device also comes with a 400MHz Intel XScale processor for handhelds, 64MB of memory, a built-in keyboard and a transflective display with a resolution of 320 pixels by 320 pixels. Palm is working with VL Inc. to make VLI's Gphone software available on the Tungsten C starting in June. Using Gphone, Tungsten C owners will be able to use Wi-Fi networks to make phone calls. Palm is also working with Wayport and WiFinder to improve the consumer's ability to find and access hot spots. Wayport is offering a 30-day free trial to its service, which makes hot spot access available in areas such as hotels and airports. WiFinder provides directories to more than 5,443 free public hot spots in North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia and New Zealand. Palm also said it recognizes that security is a major concern for businesses looking to install wireless networks and purchase devices that can access those networks. It's working with Meetinghouse Data Communications to make its Aegis wireless local area network software available on Tungsten C devices later this summer. Aegis supports Cisco Systems' LEAP (Lightweight Extensible Authentication Protocol), which requires the client and the access point to authenticate each other in order to access the network. Additionally, a virtual private network client is also supported to secure the transmission of data between a Tungsten C and the network. In separate but related news, Palm said it has teamed with cellular carrier Orange France to sell the Tungsten W in France starting this summer. The Tungsten W is a combination phone, organizer and e-mail device and shares a similar design with the Tungsten C. Instead of a Wi-Fi radio chip built in, though, it has a GSM/GPRS (Global System for Mobile Communications/General Packet Radio Service) chip so it can access cellular networks. http://www.businessweek.com/technology/cnet/stories/1011216.htm -- "NEXTEL-1 IT'S NOT JUST NEXTEL" Note The New address Subscribe to Nextel-1: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL-1 "NEXTEL2 FOR iDEN SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS" Subscribe to Nextel2: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/NEXTEL2 "WIRELESS FORUM HOMELAND SECURITY GROUP" The Complete Resource for Wireless Homeland Security. Subscribe to WFHSG: http://www.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/WFHSG ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sentto-327560-7859-1054528442-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Mon Jun 2 00:34:34 2003 Received: from n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com (n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.66.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA11594 for ; Mon, 2 Jun 2003 00:34:33 -0400 (EDT) X-eGroups-Return: sentto-327560-7859-1054528442-mobileip-archive=lists.ietf.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.67.194] by n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jun 2003 04:34:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 85352 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2003 04:34:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jun 2003 04:34:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.78) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2003 04:34:01 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net Received: from [66.218.67.177] by n22.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jun 2003 04:33:59 -0000 X-Sender: Marcelrf@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 90609 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2003 04:02:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jun 2003 04:02:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf37bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.140) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2003 04:02:42 -0000 Received: from bellsouth.net ([68.158.65.7]) by imf37bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.25 201-253-122-122-125-20020815) with ESMTP id <20030602040455.VFVA10203.imf37bis.bellsouth.net@bellsouth.net> for ; Mon, 2 Jun 2003 00:04:55 -0400 Message-ID: <3EDACC41.99FAEFFE@bellsouth.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: "NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com" From: Marcelrf@Bellsouth.net X-Yahoo-Profile: marcel_rf1 X-eGroups-Approved-By: marcel_rf1 via web; 02 Jun 2003 04:33:58 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com; contact NEXTEL-1-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 00:02:09 -0400 Subject: [NEXTEL-1] washingtonpost.com: Executives Resigned To Their Options Reply-To: NEXTEL-1@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------054EAE6E70D0AB7412D7C3B5" --------------054EAE6E70D0AB7412D7C3B5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A63328-2003May31?language=printer ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/61FxlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --------------054EAE6E70D0AB7412D7C3B5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1; name="A63328-2003May31" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="A63328-2003May31" Content-Base: "http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-d yn/A63328-2003May31?language=printe r" Content-Location: "http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-d yn/A63328-2003May31?language=printe r" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 washingtonpost.com: Executives Resigned To Their Options washingtonp= ost.com

Executives Resigned To Their Options
Change in Accounting Rules Would Cost Some Local Companies

By Jackie Spinner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, June 2, 2003; Page E01=20

They don't want to say it is inevitable, but corporate leaders at some W= ashington area companies that offer stock-option packages are resigning the= mselves to a future when handing out such incentives to employees and execu= tives will cost them -- and at some companies, cost them big.

For cre= dit card issuer Capital One Financial Corp., recognizing options as an expe= nse would have shaved $157 million from its 2002 net income of $899 million= . The McLean company makes generous use of options to compensate employees,= even going so far as to pay its top two executives only in options. Richar= d D. Fairbank, chairman and chief executive, and Nigel W. Morris, president= and chief operating officer, do not collect any salary or bonus but were g= ranted options on nearly 6 million shares for the past two years. That save= d the company the $6.5 million it would have paid them in salary and bonuse= s. Three other executives receive options in place of half of their cash bo= nuses.

Under current rules, compensating its executives this way, in= essence, costs Capital One nothing.

The private-sector board that w= rites U.S. accounting rules is considering requiring companies to treat sto= ck options as expenses, a change that would have a broad impact on earnings= of Washington area companies. The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FA= SB), which is debating how to value the options, has said the new rule coul= d be in place sometime next year.

In interviews with some of the larg= est public companies in the region, the companies defended how they've acco= unted for options in the past. Some criticized the attempt to change the ru= le but said they nonetheless would change their accounting if ordered to do= so. Some declined to comment on the merits of changing the rule, an effort= that has been highly politicized by some members of Congress and that has = been a sensitive topic in light of recent corporate scandals.

"If the= FASB makes a rule, we'll comply," said Rob Doolittle, spokesman for Falls = Church-based defense contractor General Dynamics Corp. "But we'll leave the= debate to others."

Tatiana Stead, a spokeswoman for Capital One, sai= d the company wants a new standard that will "achieve comparability for tho= se who follow our financial results." In other words, as long as the new st= andard applies equally to all of the credit card company's peers, no proble= m.

Stock options give employees and executives the right to buy share= s in their company for a set price in the future. The purchase price is set= usually on the day the option is granted, so the executive or the employee= holding the option will only profit if the market price of the stock incre= ases. Thus, the incentive to the holder is to create value and make the sto= ck price rise. A standard option grant vests over a number of years, usuall= y four, and expires after 10 years. If the stock price decreases over the l= ife of the option, it expires worthless.

The cost to the company come= s when the option is exercised, because the company is selling its stock fo= r less than what it would get if it were selling it on the open market. The= company is forfeiting something of value and giving it to an employee. Thu= s, according to proponents of expensing stock options, they are a real cost= to a company's existing shareholders and should be reflected on the income= statement -- that part of the financial statement that calculates profit o= r loss -- when they are granted.

Current accounting rules require onl= y that companies estimate the cost of options in footnotes to their financi= al statements rather than recognizing them as a cost on their income statem= ents. And for some companies, that has meant the difference between showing= a profit or showing a loss. For other already profitable firms, it has sav= ed them millions of dollars in compensation expenses.

For example, if= General Dynamics had treated stock option awards to executives and employe= es as an expense in 2002, its $917 million in reported earnings would have = decreased by $28 million. Arlington power company AES Corp., which reported= a $3.5 billion loss in 2002, would have lost $148 million more if it had b= een required to treat options as expenses. And Gannett Co., the McLean-base= d media company, would have reduced its profit by $52.8 million from $1.2 b= illion.

Critics of requiring companies to treat options as expenses s= ay it will deter companies from using them, hurting rank-and-file workers a= nd eliminating an incentive high-tech and other start-up companies, in part= icular, have relied upon to attract employees. They also challenge whether = the FASB can come up with a method for valuing stock options that accuratel= y reflects their cost.

"Option-pricing models require highly subjecti= ve assumptions, including the expected stock price volatility," said Audrey= Schaefer, spokeswoman for Nextel Communications Inc., a wireless phone com= pany based in Reston. "Like many other highly traded technology stocks, our= s is volatile, as compared to a Coca Cola, for example, and therefore these= formulas become punitive and provide an inaccurate impression of value."

Nextel's reported $1.7 billion in net income available to common share= holders in 2002 would have been reduced to $1.3 billion if the company had = been required to treat options as expenses. McLean consulting firm BearingP= oint would have taken an even bigger hit. The company's $26.9 million repor= ted loss in 2002 would have more than tripled to $95.4 million if it had de= ducted the option from its bottom line.

The ability to issue stock op= tions was one of the reasons BearingPoint Inc., formerly KPMG Consulting In= c., went public 2001. John A. Schneidawind, a spokesman for BearingPoint, s= aid the systems integration and business consulting firm had suffered an ex= odus of employees to firms that did offer options and it had a hard time ge= tting people in without them.

"We wanted to use stock options as a re= tention tool," he said. "It's still a weapon against companies that are not= offering them."

Schneidawind declined to comment on how a new accoun= ting rule would affect the firm.

"We can't speculate on what we will = or will not do without something solid to go on from FASB," he said.

= Capital One's Stead said the company would "consider many factors" in reass= essing its compensation program if it is forced to treat options as an expe= nse, including "the format of incentive awards for our employees."

So= me companies are considering issuing restricted stock grants rather than op= tions if the proposed accounting rule change is adopted. Restricted stock, = which is counted as an expense under current accounting rules, is subject t= o limitations on when it can be sold.

Marriott International Inc. alr= eady has decided to limit its use of stock options, it announced before its= May shareholders' meeting. In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Co= mmission, the company said restricted stock awards will replace annual opti= on awards granted to the majority of senior management.

In 2002, the = company recognized $9 million in expenses for deferred and restricted stock= awards. Had it been required to treat options the same way, Marriott would= have recognized $55 million more, reducing its reported profit from $277 m= illion to $222 million.

Marriott spokesman Tom Marder declined to com= ment, referring instead to the company's proxy, in which it outlined its ob= jection to a shareholder proposal requiring Marriott to establish a policy = to treat options as expenses.

The company cited industry practice -- = the majority of companies do not treat options as expenses -- as one of the= main reasons it did not want to adopt a new policy. It also noted that the= information is available to shareholders in the financial statements.

<= p>"We believe that this accounting treatment both adequately informs shareh= olders of the financial impact of stock options and makes it easier to comp= are our financial performance to that of other companies," it said.

S= hareholders overwhelmingly defeated the resolution by more than 67 percent.=

Jim Spellane, a spokesman for the International Brotherhood of Elec= trical Workers' pension fund, which proposed the resolution, said companies= have relied far too much on options to compensate top executives.

Bo= oking the expense "is a way of being honest," he said. "It gives a truer pi= cture of what the company's finances are. It's an issue of fairness."

Critics such as the electrical workers' union have said the potential rich= es of options gave some corporate executives the incentive to use deceptive= accounting practices to boost their companies' profits and stock prices du= ring the stock bubble of the 1990s. Some also point out that companies now = get to deduct the cost of options from their taxable income when they are e= xercised, seemingly a double standard.

Capital One, for example, reco= gnized $22 million in tax benefits from the exercise of stock options by it= s employees during 2002. General Dynamics had tax benefits of $25 million i= n 2001, and MedImmune Inc., a biotechnology firm headquartered in Gaithersb= urg, recognized a tax benefit of $14,804 in 2001, down from $24,505 in 2000= and $111,720 in 1999.

Although MedImmune's tax benefit was relativel= y minor, the impact of treating stock options as expenses is a significant = issue for the company. MedImmune reported a $1 billion loss in 2002 but wou= ld have lost $19.2 million more if it had booked the options as a cost.

=

"The company's perspective is that stock options have been a very valuab= le part of the compensation package," said Gregory S. Patrick, chief financ= ial officer for MedImmune.

But how to account for them is an issue "= that has been taken out of our hands," he said. "The FASB has signaled very= clearly that stock options are a form of compensation. The FASB has taken = the position that they are going to be required to be expensed. We'll have = to do that whether we like it or not."

Several executives said a new = accounting rule would not necessarily be the death of options in the region= , something lobbying groups opposed to the FASB effort have said would be t= he result.

"That may be overblown," said Wayne M. Rehberger, chief fi= nancial officer of XO Communications Inc., a telecommunications firm based = in Reston. "I personally never took a job because I got stock options. Stoc= k options are one lever in a series of levers to pull when you're trying to= recruit people. Will it affect how extensively you use them? Maybe."

Rehberger said XO, which emerged from bankruptcy protection in January, is= a good example in the difficulty in valuing options.

Like most compa= nies, XO used the Black-Scholes option-pricing model to value its shares. T= hat model relies on a number of assumptions to predict the future value of = the company's stock.

In 2002, the company reported a loss of $804 mil= lion. If it had treated stock options as an expense, that number would have= risen to $3.4 billion. But the assumptions the company used to value the o= ptions didn't count on bankruptcy. XO filed for bankruptcy last year and em= erged earlier this year as effectively a new company; all of its former sto= ck was rendered worthless.

"It shows how silly Black-Scholes is," Reh= berger said.

Earlier this year, the company redistributed stock optio= ns under the reorganization plan approved by the bankruptcy court. In the f= irst quarter, it reported a $21.4 million loss. Had it been required to tre= at the options as expenses, its losses would have risen to $24.5 million.

Its stock-option expenses, Rehberger said, are now "immaterial."

=20=20

© 2003 The Washington Post Company