Slashdot Mirror
VoIP Going Wireless
imashoe writes "CNet's News.com reports on the wireless future of VoIP. Similarly BonaFideReviews.com has published an interesting article that attempts to predict what the future of voice communications will be like. The two editorals seem to agree that VoIP is going mobile and in a big way."
actually, this doesn't involve the marriage of technology. it involves getting VOIP and Skype-type services to work over wireless connections. actually, this technology has been around for a while, but it's been very expensive. if the cost comes down and the quality increases, you'll see companies start to move to wireless VOIP implementations. there is also software VOIP that could try to make good connections over public wifi networks.
cell phones aren't involved in this, except that in some areas this could be a threat to their market (if, say you live and work in downtown Long Beach, CA, where there's a free muni wifi network).
I am no luddite, but this a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Using existing *public* Internet carriers for low-latency and naturally real-time voice streams is asking for a trainwreck.
As an end user wishing to say, tie together two offices of my company with VOIP, there is a lot that is not under my control. Although I can use QoS/various traffic shaping facilties to ensure minimum latency and maximum bandwith for VOIP on *my* side of things, I have completely no control over what happens to the data when goes out of my DSL modem into the DSLAM and on forward (or T1 line, whatever).
QoS: A lot of ISPs dump all IP QoS flags, silently, because well... heh... they can provide that for mucho dinero. Even if they don't, who is to guarantee that my voice won't get congested someplace clogged by someone's pr0n torrents? No one.
Mobile VOIP is not new folks. Your Sprint phone uses SIP over IP. Your iDen phone uses TCP/IP to communicate to the servers. The mobile carriers, however, have their own private networks that are not part of the ``Intarweb''. The mobile carriers can control traffic on their network. The mobile carriers can ensure service. Combining mobile phone technology with VOIP over the public Internet is going to combine the worst of both worlds - get cut off because network congestion someplace upstream or lose the signal. I'll pass.
Btw, of course I didn't RTFA.
The only VoIP "solution" than really matters in the long run is SIP. It will eventually win out because it's an open standard, and already supported by the popular Gizmo Project (http://gizmoproject.com./ I'm currently using an analog telephone to SIP adapter, and calls to other SIP users directly over the net are clearer than PSTN-to-PSTN calls by a great margin. To handle dialing sip addresses like brokenladder@iptel.org, you just register with a free ENUM number at enum2go.com (uses the standard e164.arpa) or get one at e164.org for instance. Then you can go to brokenladder.com and look at the contact page to call me and test out your equipment ;)
3G wireless phone services ARE packet based data networks. The 3G voice protocols are more optimized for voice than layering on top of IP. The network exists and building a redundant network ONLY makes sense because of regulated competition. The problem isn't a technical one. It is a question of markets, taxes, monopolies, states rights, lobbying ... in other words, your government (and your phone company) in action.
A beginners' guide to Portland, OR?
Well the phones are there and are being tested in several markets that switch seamlessly, already testing europe, and in some small areas here.
I might happen to work for a large carrier, and the times are a changing.
If you want to keep up on the latest cell tech.
www.gsmworld.com
www.phonescoop.com this being the better of the two.
Puto
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
(b) Yes and yes. Most VOIP providers like Vonage will give you an adapter that can directly connect to the internet, which means you don't need the computer. But to use Skype you need to go through the computer.
It seems Skype does use encryption, it uses it in such a way that is comparible to SSL. If skype did it right the fact that the wireless connection is open for anyone to read doesn't matter much (only thing one could see are the endpoints of the conversation I'd guess).
Compared to e.g. email skype is much more secure, even though you might do your best to use email as secure as possible you have no control over the recipient and the transport to them.
I'm a CS student and a network technician at Radford University, we've already employed VOIP Wireless in our department. We're using the Cisco 7920 IP phones, they work great as long as you're well, standing still. We have about 2-300 Cisco Aironets and hopping from one AP to another doesn't work too well right now. Most of the time that the 7920s work well you're standing next to a working 7960.
The technology is not new, and if I recall correctly there is a cell phone (PDA style) that supports VOIP over 802.11.
Secure as in the government isn't listening. Think Echelon, Carnivore, Total Information Awareness, etc. What we need is end-to-end encryption implemented by free software that is subject to public auditing. Proprietary protocols, encoding schemes, ciphers, and software implementations cannot be trusted nor relied upon. I can't believe some of the responses here defending Skype and pulling key escrow out of the trash bin and promoting it as necessary, responsible, and inevitable. As long as corporations like Skype don't control the software infrastructure, key escrow will remain unworkable and our freedom will be safe (at least in this area).
If the police can do it, so can other people.
Cellular interception (from phone to tower) requires, say a $50K scanner, complex radio equipment and software.
Computers used to cost $50K too.