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 ""
I have experienced no problems with it since I had VoIP installed by my ISP. Long distance calls to the US are essentially free, as are calls to Germany, Japan, and really anywhere except for Africa. I haven't tried calling NZ yet, but I imagine that it's pretty much the same as calling any other place in Oceania.
We occasionally see annecdotal evidence that 802.11 can successfully carry voice traffic. These events are highly situational and generally only happen in rural areas where a single player controls all the high ground. If you're writing a business plan based on transiting voice on a point to point unlicensed band link you're very brave, if you're planning on doing it point to multipoint you need one of those jackets that helps you hug yourself. I've deployed 802.11b, Alvarion Breeze Access II, and various UNI band access products in a five county area that contains the 53rd largest metro area in the US. Note that I said "I have" - my BP had been 110/70 my whole life but in the last ninety days before I quit that and got a job that paid it peaked at 148/98. Even if you avoid the stock fraud dirtbags, the outright equipment theft dirtbags, the theft by deception dirtbags, and the cheesy mafioso dirtbags with grandfathered licenses in the ISM band, you're still facing the simple fact that any dork with $500 and a building on top of a hill can start a wireless play, crap all over the spectrum, and there simply isn't any recourse. Voice belongs on licensed spectrum and it always will. The *only* exception to this is sideband T1 usage on high quality point to point links - think Proxim Tsunamis at $14k a pair and you're on the right track.
I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
I dont see cell phones that are only 802.11 going anywhere anytime soon, but I do see dual mode phones taking the market. Making a call via 802.11 when available and using the normal cell phone network when 802.11 is too busy or unreliable.
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
My boss tried to advocate this for our new building. The next morning the halfcompetents who run our IT department had the network go down for a couple of hours. Not to mention the fact that most of the site was paralyzed for 3 days by the last round of worms.
Sorry, you've just bundled all my communication over a single VERY FAILURE-PRONE medium. I'm willing to pay for 5 or 6 9s of uptime rather than cruise by on the cheap. If we had VOIP we couldn't even get in touch with our department tech (savvy and on top of things) when we got DoS'd.
On another slightly related note: Anyone know where I can buy a 802.11b frequency jammer?
I think they're called Microwave Ovens. You'll probably have to mod it to remove some safety features, but it should have the desired effect when turned on in the vicinity of any 802.11b receivers. You might want to invest in a pair of shielded briefs and a grounded tin-foil hat though...
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.