Low Cost VOIP Providers

True. But I slowly get the impression that's the majority. If a technology is too complex to be handled by the majority of planners and installers then maybe it's just too complex.

They most likely won't care one bit. They won't understand a thing of it.

Yup.

True home automation must IMHO have at least the option of being accessible via phone and Internet.

And, the security required to ensure that it's safe against the silly pranks and and malicious hacking of tens of thousands of Internet denizens, ranging from junior-high-school script- kiddy wannabes up through sociopathic cybercriminals.

By that standard, *automobiles* have been "too complex" for decades!

That's why you provide conventional CAT1 wiring terminated on

Yup. And, with voice I/O, extending access to POTS is a lead-pipe cinch! No need to add some "press 1 for lights; press 2 for HVAC; press 3 for..." nonsense after-the-fact!

(how does any of that make sense when you are *inside* the home and NOT on the phone??)

That's actually not hard to do --if you *plan* on that from the start and don't just "bolt it on", later.

E.g., you can *know* my IP address, install a packet sniffer on my network feed and *still* not gain access to anything inside the home.

What's more, I can hold the front door open for you, help you cart whatever kit you want *into* the house and *still* be safe from your attempts at hackery (short of burning down the place).

The best you can do is deny me access to a control channel over the same medium that you happen to be using. But, you could ALWAYS do that: just cut the damn wire and I can't use it! (i.e., silly to spend any effort beyond this level of protection)

The problem with most "remotely accessible" devices (whether they are accessed via IP, wireless, etc.) is that the developers don't address security from the ground up.

E.g., if you design a product that *relies* on that remote access to perform its normal function (e.g., services in the cloud!), then you've got a built in vulnerability: if I can deny you access to that external resource, then you won't be able to operate properly.

Similarly, if you assume "no one would ever want to hack my device" (e.g., TOILET) and, thus, never put any thought into protecting against such hacks, then you'll be chagrined when someone *does* hack it (as evidenced in recent media reports re: toilets, cars, baby monitors, door locks, etc.).

When it comes to security, reliability, etc. there's a really simple solution: enumerate all your assumptions. Then, challenge *each* of them. Then, *repeat* the exercise.

"/* CAN'T HAPPEN */" usually *does*!

Some of that is by law, nothing you or I can do much about it other than buying an oldtimer. Smog controls, ECU, all that is now mandated. But other than that one can buy cars with the least amount of technology. That's what we did in 1997 and it paid off well. Looks what they drive in the boonies of Africa or South America. You almost can't go wrong.

They won't care. They'll likely put in a cordless system with five or more handsets, no more sockets needed. That's how it is here now, after I laid all the cables.

Voice I/O is something I don't really like. It will disturb folks in a quiet environment, someone taking a nap. It can also have trouble with accents, especially foreign ones. "Thaw the cheese" ... microwave turns on defrost. "Taw da chiss" ... nothing happens. "Ssaw zee tchies" ... nothing happens. Doesn't even have to be foreign. "I am tired" ... lights dim down. "Ahm tarred" ... nothing happens.

A lot. Many times we'll have a cordless handset on the belt or next to us because a call is expected.

Yep. You can do it today with a VLAN or Layer 3 switch. A VLAN is one or more Layer 3 (IP) networks on a single Layer 2 (MAC) switch. Some of the more elaborate switches offer bandwidth management and bandwidth allocation per VLAN. The most common way is to allocate different QoS service levels for each VLAN where IP phone traffic gets tagged with the highest priority, while most everything else is tagged with a lower priority. I don't expect to see VLAN's and bandwidth management in home networks for quite some time. It is common in corporate LAN's where it's often not desirable to have duplicated hardware and wiring to access each network.

Of course, keeping the VLAN virtual networks separated, when they share a common switch and cabling, is not easy: It's on the Backtrack Linux DVD.

Hint: About 95% of the attacks that I've seen on business networks do NOT originate from the internet via the firewall, but rather originate internally from a local computah or device.

Also, putting my IP phone directly on the internet is becoming problematic because of robotic attacks on my phone by someone thinking they've found an Asterisk server. The SPA921 firmware does not do well and tends to either hang or reboot spontaneously.

People haven't the most basic idea of how their car works. Car manufacturers knew this ages ago -- hence the idiot light instead of the gauges (even folks who *buy* instrumentation packages often do it for some sense of exotica).

They'll still need *someplace* to connect that to the wired network. "Gee, there's no phone jack, here!"

E.g., when we had DSL, I just picked some corner of a room to set up the DSL modem; plugged the phone line into the modem; then ran a patch cord from the modem *into* the RJ45 below the phone jack.

Then how do you interact with a multifaceted system? Hundreds of menu options?

"Press 1 for HVAC; 2 for security; 3 for... You have selected HVAC. If this is not correct, press 9. Press 1 for heat; 2 for cooling;

1. Press 1 to set indoor temperature; press 2 to set humidification options; press 3..."

That's when you try to design an unconstrained vocabulary! If you implement a fixed vocabulary, you get considerably higher recognition rates. E.g., speaking one of ten digits (and ONLY digits) its really easy to approach 100% first pass recognition rate. OTOH, if you allow the user to recite portions of a Shakespearean sonnet at will, then you're probably going to spend a lot of time with, "No, that's not what I said"!

Speech is the most ubiquitous interface. We deal with it every day. It's how we *want* to interact with things.

Would you *want* to be required to interact with the system through that? "Honey, where's the phone? I want to turn the heat up..."

Yup. "Plugs", social engineering, etc. When I designed the infrastructure, here, no two points on the network can talk to each other unless I let them (and specify the types of traffic they can exchange!).

I.e., imagine a firewall in front of each RJ45, *everywhere*!

(unfortunately, moving to wireless has me baffled... no way to prevent DoS attacks on *every* link - cuz I can't "protect" wireless links with physical security like I can wired ones!)

Wasn't designed with the possibilities of that environment in mind!

At school, most telephone extensions had outbound dialing restrictions on their use. So, you (student) couldn't just pick up a phone and call your grandparents in Germany, etc.

But, there were many phones in places that were considered inaccessible or "unknown" that had no such restrictions. So, find one of these and you're golden! (until someone audits the phone log and wonders who was calling Germany at 3AM!!)

Well, buy a simple car like we did. They still have a check-engine light (mandatory here) and also a charge light, oil pressure light and so on.

There is always one in the kitchen, that's where people tend to keep the base because often it has the answering machine in it.

We have a barrage of filters, DSL runs everywhere. But the time of DSL is more or less over.

Yup. After a while I have them memorized.

Then one might as well press the buttons.

Followed by "DURN IT" :-)

Well, I for one don't want to. Whenever I hear a message that says I have to speak stuff into the receiver and no option to punch numbers I have to suppress a not so nice expression. Sometimes then I just start pounding "0" until a live person shows up.

Speaking Yes ... YES!! ... no ... thirty-four ... into a phone sounds a bit dorky to me. I do not like to do that.

No, but the other option is carrying a remote around. Hollering from the other end of the yard "BASKETBALL COURT LIGHTS ON!" is not particularly appreciated in this neighborhood :-)

We've been through this before. No need for me to rant about it again. However, I have a new horror story. Another office in the building switched to ADSL2+ and 8x8 VoIP service (4 lines) using Polycom hardware. They were complaining about garbled audio. Since they had a service contract with various vendors, I had to get permission and passwords before I could do any investigating. In talking with the IT people, I was rather impressed with their competence.

That changed as soon as I dived in. What I found was:

1. The router was an antique from the stone age and could barely operate at speed (8 Mbits/sec down, 1 Mbit/sec up). However, it did have all the necessary features.
2. The router had SPI (stateful packet inspection) enabled, which tends to produce out of order packets. Running a jitter test confirmed the problem. Turning off SPI solved it, but I think a new router would be a better fix.
3. The service was allegedly configured for Annex A, but the modem (Speedstream 4100) said otherwise.
4. Nobody had bothered to reserve any bandwidth for VoIP packets. QoS was turned off. SIP protocol was not the highest priority.
5. The company was using Dropbox on all machines, carrying about 1.5 Gigabloats of data. However, someone had turned off local delivery resulting in everything going out via the internet, to the Dropbox server, and back again to the individual machines. Although I would have preferred to only enable Dropbox during the late evening, enabling local delivery was a big help.
6. All of the machines were capable of doing gigabit ethernet, yet they only had a 10/100baseT switch. I added an 8 port gigabit switch to the existing 24 port switch, moving the high traffic machines to the faster LAN.
7. The fairly new Seagate NAS box was in the last stages of HD meltdown and was slowing everyone down. The problem was that it was generating large numbers of retransmissions resulting in copious traffic, but little thruput. Wireshark capture was disgusting. The device had the good sense to die before I could rip it out and warranty it across the room.

I went on vacation before I could fix everything, but at this time, the VoIP is working and nobody is complaining.

Please do NOT assume that everything is just wonderful and that any garble is the fault of the VoIP system or technology. VoIP is real time and therefore sensitive to a wider range of network anomalies. Everything could be working adequately and only VoIP might show problems. That what I think you saw at this company.

Ahem... The original GSM was 35 km maximum. It can now do 120 km. Effectively, it's borrowing an extra time slot to extend the range . Rural cell sites use this feature, although it's usually disabled in dense metro areas.

That largely depends on the acceptance and implementation of 802.11r, fast roaming: In order to preserve an IP address between the cellular and wi-fi networks, both the wi-fi and cellular routers have to be able to route the session IP address. If the IP address was delivered initially by cellular, that means the wi-fi router will need to assign a static route to the cellular router that originally handled the IP traffic. That isn't happening and is unlikely to happen in the future. What is happening is when a cellular service provider offers wi-fi, they own both the cellular and wi-fi routers, making the transition possible. Then, all we have to do is wait for smartphone vendors to support

Did he have to crank the magneto in order to ring the operator at the other end?

Look into what is misnamed "AP isolation" but is really "client isolation". I use it heavily in my few remaining hot spots and coffee shop networks to prevent customers computers from attacking each other. It's standard on most wireless routers and access points. It blocks any traffic between two wireless clients. The catch is that it does nothing between the various computahs on the ethernet switch, which can still merrily attack each other.

Yep. However, putting the phone behind the router/firewall isn't helping much. Ports 5060-5064 (SIP) are still exposed to the internet via port forwarding and UPnP. So, I still get attacked. I've tried various firewall rules, which help, but not completely. It also doesn't help when I'm traveling. Yet another project.

I'm not worried about a client being "vulnerable". Recall my approach: "like having a firewall on EVERY network connector!"

The problem is an attacker can flood the airwaves and prevent clients from *intentionally* intercommunicating. Then, things fall to pieces.

E.g., I prevent anyone from injecting foreign traffic into the

So, if that node was a security camera, the system would know that "security camera X" is now offline -- and it shouldn't be! (you couldn't inject phony video masquerading *as* that camera)

With a wireless network fabric, you can effectively interfere with *all* communications simultaneously. Like taking an axe to *the* network switch.

Because they are probably targeting you with in-band traffic?

Have you looked at any of the traffic to see what they are trying to do? I.e., which ASSUMPTIONs they are trying to exploit?

Google for known vulnerabilities with that kit?

Knowing buzz words and how to string them together doesn't necessarily imply they understand the underlying issues. Or, have *competently* implemented them!

Part of the problem with thinking of things as "black boxes" is you intentionally *avoid* thinking about what's really going on -- and *why*! And, you conveniently forget all the preconditions that *should* have been applied, etc.

Manufacturers want you to think everything is "piece of cake" lest you be scared away from it. And, they can't realistically be expected to hold your hand and walk you through the specifics of *your* particular problem set.

So, you remember the generalizations and forget the specifics that make all the difference. Then, wonder why things aren't quite what you expected...

I've always been amazed at how readily people shrug off "freakish behaviors": "Hmmm, that shouldn't have happened!"

Um, but it *did*! Has it occurred to you that maybe you should figure out *why* it happened? And, consider yourself *lucky* that you were able to observe that it *did* happen -- so you aren't arguing with a customer who later "claims" he saw some similar manifestation! :-/

I don't think you understand the *scale* of what I am doing. :>

How many "codes" are there to control a TV? Volume up Volume down SAP on/off CC on/off Mute/Unmute channel up channel down previous channel channel N select DVD input pause resume power on/off tint up/down PIP on/off PIP swap freeze video balance left/right/front/back treble/bass up/down

What about your "stereo"? select tuner/CD/iPod/stream select channel/program select artist/album/track (which artist is #5?) volume up/down tone controls pause track forward/backward fast forward/backward return to top loop/shuffle/random

How do you tell the TV to route the live video feed from the front door onto the screen and pause video source you are watching?

How do you ask the phone system if there have been any messages? How do you command it to play them? Preserve/erase them? Leave an outgoing message for a *particular* caller?

Ditto for the doorbell -- any visitors? How do you command the system to replay the video/audio footage of their presence *at* the door?

What's the code to tell the washing machine that you want it to run an extra rinse cycle because the laundry detergent is too strong for your skin? Or, the dryer that it should run a gentle cycle on low heat?

Do you have to memorize which plants are on each irrigation zone? How do you command the system to provide some extra water to the roses?

How do you check the status of the garage door? And, command it closed if you find it open?

How do you come up with a mnemonic device to remember these? Does your wife have to adopt the same mnemonic device?

Or, do *you* assign the codes in a manner that makes sense to you and let her assign them in a manner that makes sense to her?

It's just *so* much easier to say what you want and let the system guide your choices.

Which button is "roses"? Or, "garage"?

In the case of home automation, I guess that live person would be what -- a butler?? :>

I didn't say you were doing it into a phone. Only when you are trying to *access* the system remotely *via* a phone! Why should I have to carry a phone around when I'm home?

But you don't have to do that! :>

My current plans allow for the use of a BT headset within the house/yard (because dealing with ambient noise in speech recognition is too much for me to tackle). In certain areas (e.g., shower), an "open mic" performs the same function (though when in the shower, you wouldn't be likely to say "water the roses" -- though you might say, "tell me who's calling on the phone"); voice over a telephone connection; "buttons/icons" over an internet connection or from one of the four "control panels" inside the house; and buttons/voice when accessed via "wireless terminals" around the house.

In each case, the interface is tied to the location in which it is operated and the "device" implementing it. E.g., *your* BT earpiece is configured differently from mine and each varies depending on where we are located when we issue commands.

E.g., "channel up" wouldn't apply to a TV if there wasn't a TV in the room. But, it *would* apply to a stereo located therein! (OTOH, it wouldn't be recognized at all if you were in the back yard!)

That would be nice, but not required. I don't mind porting the equipment from one place to another. That is what my friend does when she comes to my place. Her VOIP modem comes with her and so the service as well.

That makes no sense to me. Competition is not just in the price, but in getting the customer which is often a matter of making it *easy* form them. Just look at how long AOL was able to hold onto customers who simply didn't know how or want to know how to get on the Internet by a standard ISP. That was when ISPs didn't make it as easy as they do now.

Powerful??? I want a phone. I've said this any number of times. I just want a phone that looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... or a POTS. That's not really hard to do.

Many of these services let you "bring your own equipment" in which case this issue is moot. It's not the box that has the magic, it is in the provider. They need to get smart. If they provide quality service then they should be able to market it profitably. But they seem to fall short in some ways. I guess there just isn't a lot of markup and some folks try to take advantage... Don't know.

Wallmart is vending Clearcall for someone, maybe Vonage. Sounds good at $10 a month for unlimited, but I've read they aren't good at some aspect, don't remember what it was. Free setup including 911. Oh yeah, no business use, including home businesses... that leaves me out if I want to follow the rules. I bet they only care if you make a lot of calls or use a *lot* of air time... well, wire time or whatever it would be... lol Oh, they also charge taxes and "mandated Government fees" but don't say how much they are. I find that is usually a rip off where they are passing *their* taxes on to the user and claim that the Government requires them to do that. I was even told that lie by AT&T when I used them for long distance. I called the FCC and was told it was *their* tax to pay and it was being passed on to me, not that the FCC required them to collect it from the customers. Now they word it differently.

Yeah well, I don't know how to do that. I'm sure it is simple once you learn what tools are available and where to find them, but that is info I don't have.

But like I said, a friend has brought her phone here and used it for hours on two occasions. Isn't the proof of the pudding in the eating?

You may understand the technology, but you clearly don't get people. I want a phone. A phone is a simple to use device no matter what the technology is. It could be a phone going over a $100 million satellite connection, but that doesn't mean I should need to know orbital mechanics. I just need to know the phone number I want to dial.

No, *I don't* need to know all of that. I need to find a company that knows how it all works and they just *make it happen*. Even the POTS has become very complex over the last few decades. At one time it was referred to as the largest distributed computer system in the world. I don't need to program to use a phone though.

I thought I was asking about getting VOIP phone service. I just want to find one that is low cost and still workable. I keep reading about how poor most of the low cost providers are.

In what, the fact that I don't want to have to learn more engineering stuff to use a telephone? I would be the same way with computers but that isn't remotely practical. But even they are getting better.

There are different meanings to "low cost". I don't want to pay $35 a month to Vonage. Something like the $10 a month for BasicTalk would be better if it worked well and I could actually find out what it costs.

Exactly. So I don't need to know about it.

Yeah, well that excludes some 90% of the potential customers. Very few people have enough experience with VOIP to set up a complex system, much less the interest.

What features are there? I guess I don't know what I don't know. What am I missing?

I need a phone replacement, that's all. The cell service here is poor and I am spending more on minutes that I would like. Like I've said before, combine that with the office landline I barely use because I"m not in the office a lot and a VOIP sounds like a good solution. Cheap calls and a portable phone that works anywhere I can get an Internet connection. So far Callcentric sounds like the best for me, but I still have questions they haven't answered very well, like the 911 fees.

Then why not just buy whatever *she* has? You already *know* it will work, right?

You're missing the point.

You can run MSWindows -- paying MS for a license to use the OS. You can then *buy* an email program (if you don't like MSOutlook). And, *buy* a spreadsheet, word processor, database, etc. And, *buy* a compiler (if you write code). And, *buy* a CAD program. And, *buy* a schematic capture/PCB layout system. And, *buy*...

And, all these things will just work "out of the box" (or, will at least *claim* to do so!). And, you'll have someone to hold your hand when things don't work (at least for some initial period of time)

Between hardware and software, you can *easily* spend $10K, $20K or more on a single workstation!

Or, you could install any one of several FREE OS's. And, a *free* spreadsheet, word processor, database, compiler, CAD program, schematic capture, PCB layout, etc. ALL FOR FREE!!

But, there's a *catch*! Going the FREE route requires you to understand a bit more about how things work. You may have to do some custom configuration to make things run the way you want them to. You may have to install a "window manager" instead of relying on whatever MS has. You may have to go hunting through support forums to see if someone has already asked -- and had answered -- a question that you have. etc.

The flip-side of this "catch" is that you can do things that MS hasn't even *considered*, yet!

You have to decide how much you want to do in return for what you want to *gain* (whether that is money saved on monthly charges or features implemented that wouldn't be available otherwise or "not having to understand how things work").

If you want "no hassles", someone to hold your hand and answer the phone when you have a problem, you *pay* for that convenience.

As you *should*!

Yes, more perspectives help. The static IP address is a point I hadn't considered. I think in my contact with Callcentric I mentioned to them how I was planning to use the phone and they didn't say it would be a problem.

I don't have the option of using Comcast as they don't service this area. Cell data connections don't work reliably here either. In fact, my options for digital connectivity were limited to satellite and dial-up with a friend on satellite explaining that there isn't a lot of difference sometimes. Until... someone who provides Internet off of towers, not cell towers, but dedicated links. He uses a device in the

But you gave me an idea. I need to ask my provider if they offer any sort of VOIP service. Who knows...? They are small, but maybe he is "connected".