Slashdot Mirror


VoIP + 802.11 = Bad News For Phone Companies

r.future writes " Netstumbler, a site that has downloads for software used by wardrivers, points to an article on Red Herring that talks about combining voice over IP and 802.11 wireless technology. The article states "Individually, VoIP and 802.11 are hot technologies with promising futures. Now they are gaining attention for their potential as a combined force. Convergence, or the melding of voice calls over an IP network together with wireless 802.11 technologies, is becoming increasingly popular. VoIP reduces the need for local carrier origination and termination." both Netstumbler, and the Red Harring article point to the University of Arkansas as a example of an institution that has combined the two technologies and was able to "circumvented its local carrier and reduced monthly service fees from $530,000 to a mere $6,000 by using voice over IP technology ""

4 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. Dartmouth, Vocera by Dolohov · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This has been a big topic on the Dartmouth campus lately, with VoIP being set up campus-wide. There are lots of people who will just use it with their laptops, but several profs already have a nifty little device from Vocera which hangs around the neck on a lanyard and is mostly voice-driven. (The comparisons to a Star Trek communicator in the article are actually pretty apt, except for the size) Their CEO was just here a couple days ago giving a lecture on the device. Very cool stuff, though most of the software is necessarily server-side, and seems to cost a hefty amount.

    It's partly being touted as an alternative to cell phones (reception sucks up here) but 802.11 reception is too limited to make it worthwhile for those of us who live off-campus. Still, I'll be watching carefully to see how it goes.

  2. VoIP questions by DanThe1Man · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Are there any VoIP software that lets you call from the internet to an actual phone? I've seen tons of internet to internet proprietary phones, but never one like that.

    Does anyone know software like this?

    Is there a reason software like this dosn't exsist?

    What would need to happen to get software like this to work?

  3. Re:802.11 + VoIP == disaster in the making by arnie_apesacrappin · · Score: 2, Interesting
    While you may dismiss this as more annecdotal evidence, I currently have VoIP running over 802.11b in a large manufacturing environment. I wouldn't suggest VoIP over 802.11b in a muli-company building, but on a large campus it works quite well.

    The equipment is all Cisco and works flawlessly. The only time I can tell that someone is calling from a wireless VoIP phone is when I hear manufacturing noises in the background. The call quality is much better than a cell phone in my experience. Plus, you get all the features of your desk phone anywhere on campus (directory, etc.). It does mean that you lose the ability to use "I was away from my desk" as an excuse for missing a call.

    --

    Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP

  4. Re:Why don't you pay your AT&T bills, GNU hipp by Pxtl · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Until someone can provide a VoIP solution that can actually be configured to work behind a NAT for a normal user, this shit will always be impossible.

    I have spent _years_ looking for a good VoIP solution - but for some reason, the average videogame is more network-friendly than this major enterprise app.

    I'll explain it plain and simple: I want to connect to Port X on IP Y and have a voice chat conversation.

    Alternately, if I cannot directly point Port X to IP Y to computer Z, I want computer Z to register its name with a third party, and I use the name and that third party to connect to computer Z.

    I don't want to have to forward 90% of the IP range to my computer. I don't want to upgrade my NAT to a "compatible" router - everyone else has to program for the hardware, yet for some reason the VoIP standards bodies thought the hardware should conform to them.

    I don't want to need a 3rd party unless I'm connecting to something otherwise unreachable from the outside (anonymous user behind a NAT).

    Thats it.

    Why is it in every game I can say: I want to run a server, and I want it to run on ports X, Y and Z, and just tell everybody else "hey, connect to my IP on port X" I can, and they do, and we play. But, if I want a voice chat, I have to rewire the whole friggin' internet. No, I can't change what ports it runs on. No, all users involved need to leave all their ports open.

    Its pretty sad when X-fucking-box-live is outdoing the entire tech-industry for usable cheap VoIP.