This could be incorrect, because I haven't actually sat down and figured out exactly what's happening, but, from my own experience, here's what I've found.
If you run windows with adequate ram and no swap, it runs faster and smoother than the same setup with swap. Windows appears to push stuff into swap prematurely. example: 512MB of ram. ~200MB used. Windows is already swapping.
Linux seems to not use swap until it damn near runs out of RAM. I therefore always put swap in linux boxes, for the simple reason that it's better to have performance start degrading but still work, rather than have everything ticking along just groovy and run out of memory.
Swap *always* comes down to memory, one way or the other. If the system is not using all the ram, it can't really get any faster by using DISK instead of ram.
Don't put too much stake in what they say. What they mean is that if you expect it to sound like, and have the same unnoticeable latency as a normal landline, you have to have 200ms latency or better.
VOIP will work just fine if they are higher.
I've used it over much worse (600 to 1000ms, via satellite). What's more important is stable latency, not the latency itself.
Obviously there is an audible delay if latency is high... but beyond that, it works just fine.
Everyone likes to quote how crappy VOIP can be if network conditions are crappy.
Although that's true.. it's usually very over exaggerated.
I've used VOIP in rather deplorable network condtions.. behind several layers of low-quality NAT routers, on 256kbps cable modems that are themselves behind more NAT, with the line pinned with downloads and uploads. yes, quality drops, yes, latency increases... yes if you really let things get shitty, it gets useless... but in general, it works great, and the flexibility and savings are awesome.
You can also go outside and disconnect the POTS line if possible, just to make sure.
One word of caution.. don't hook up too many phones at once if you are doing this.... each phone you pick up (or that rings) (if the house is wired correctly) adds load to whatever is driving.. and if all that's driving is your little SIP box... you could fry it.
They don't care if you count.. they only care if you count and win.
If you win consistantly, AND they can tell you are counting, then they can be reasonably certain you will continue to win indefinately, and so will bar you from the table.
If you consistantly win some other game, they may bar you from that, even if they are unsure how you are winning.
It is impossible to beat the house playing poker in a casino poker room, because you aren't playing against the house in the first place.
Knowing pot odds is basic strategy, ever player should know. Poker is all about playing the poeple. The house does not factor into the equation at all.
Poker is in no way a game of luck, it only seems that way to the uninitiated. Getting a good hand is all luck, sure.. but the object of poker is not to win more hands, it's to win more money.
The FCC regulations for Point to Multi-Point allows only 36 dBm (4 watts) EIRP. This is 30 dBm (1 watt) into a 6 dBi antenna. If you use a 10 dBi wireless antenna, you must limit your transmitter (or amplifier) to 26 dBm (10 + 26 = 36 dBm). For a 14 dBi panel wireless antenna, this allows a 22 dBm transmitter (or amplifier).
According to FCC regulations, 2.4 GHz Part 15.247 point-to-point transmitters may use a 30 dBm transmitter with a 6 dBi antenna. For a 3 dB increase in antenna gain, the transmitter power output must be reduced by 1 dB.
My comments below:
In Canada: The maximum EIRP is 4 Watts for both point-to-point and multi-point networks with a maximum of 1 watt from the transmitter.
Meaning:
In the US, Point to point links have a distinct advantage.
When the blimp is staying up via buoyancy, it's still in atmosphere by definition. If there is atmosphere of any sort, it's rather unlikely you will find high velocity paint chips or other things.. they would quickly slow down, burn up, etc.
When the blimp is OUT of the atmosphere, at orbital velocity, it is no longer staying up there via buoyancy, and puncturing it's gasbags would not really be an issue as far as staying up there goes.
For an individual, stripping out broadcast flags to make recordings you are legally allowed to make is not a crime.
Publishing the tools to do so may be under DMCA, though.
IT's not really like DirecTV... descrambling encrypted signals without permission falls into a different category than simply bypassing a trivial recording blocker... if you are descrambling DTV, you had no rights to view the material in the first place.
No... canada works just like the US. Local calls are free. I meant long distance.
Also.. why does everyone say FWD covers the US? As far as I can tell, FWD only covers toll-free numbers and other FWD users, all VOIP. It doesn't have dialouts all over the US.
I've seen a number of medium sized businesses using asterisk, or planning to.
It's not just "some open source thing". It's solid. It's very well designed. And it is commercially support by the core developers if you want it to be. (www.digium.com)
Companies will tend to put their "mission critical" systems on stuff that works, open source or not. (Apache?)If they can pitch to the bosses this new VOIP product they can roll out for a couple thousand bucks instead of $50,000 or easily much more, most IT managers would say "That's worth a shot! Let's see how it goes."
That's just it though.. nobody is saying "no regulation".
Unlicensed is not the same thing as unregulated.
If you took a huge transmitter NOW and started doing wideband jamming... you'd be in deep shit. NO need to wait until the future when everything is UWB.
My mother has a SIP phone (actually, a SIP adapter) at home.
So does my uncle.
So does my little sister.
So do a half dozen friends (spread out over several countries in both hemispheres).
All these SIP devices connect to a very small linux box colocated in the US, running asterix (which is an excellent piece of software, btw).
Through that, I issued everyone an extension, voicemail, etc.
Further to that, anyone who wants an account at iaxtel, free world dialup, voicepulse, well, the asterix box can connect to those for them, and route calls to the appropriate extensions. It can also share the outgoing services (Which may violate some TOS, who knows) among all the users (or selected ones).
I can also use end-user phone systems as dialin/out lines, which does require some slightly different adapters.
My point?
VOIP is not a heavyweight thing. The only big scary part is locating the correct parties... this is where POTS works well.. because we have a global dialplan that everyone agrees to.
Eventually, everyone with any bandwidth will just HAVE phone service to each other, with some kind of globally understood dialplan beneath it (which will not be based on numbers at all) and links back to POTS will be fewer and rarer.
Slashdot Mirror
The average user can do all that just fine in 512MB of physical ram, in windows, with swap disabled completely. 512MB is so cheap, it's irreelvant.
That's the point here... swap is not nearly as important as it used to be.
This could be incorrect, because I haven't actually sat down and figured out exactly what's happening, but, from my own experience, here's what I've found.
If you run windows with adequate ram and no swap, it runs faster and smoother than the same setup with swap. Windows appears to push stuff into swap prematurely. example: 512MB of ram. ~200MB used. Windows is already swapping.
Linux seems to not use swap until it damn near runs out of RAM. I therefore always put swap in linux boxes, for the simple reason that it's better to have performance start degrading but still work, rather than have everything ticking along just groovy and run out of memory.
Swap *always* comes down to memory, one way or the other. If the system is not using all the ram, it can't really get any faster by using DISK instead of ram.
VoicePulse Connect, I believe.
VoicePulse Connect supports SIP or IAX.
I am unsure if other regular VoicePulse services support your choice of SIP.. they very well may.
VoicePulse definately "gets it" though.
I think packet8 might support other stuff as well.. I can't remember.
I don't think vonage is proprietary, just that they won't release any of the information you need to connect.
Don't put too much stake in what they say. What they mean is that if you expect it to sound like, and have the same unnoticeable latency as a normal landline, you have to have 200ms latency or better.
VOIP will work just fine if they are higher.
I've used it over much worse (600 to 1000ms, via satellite). What's more important is stable latency, not the latency itself.
Obviously there is an audible delay if latency is high... but beyond that, it works just fine.
Everyone likes to quote how crappy VOIP can be if network conditions are crappy.
Although that's true.. it's usually very over exaggerated.
I've used VOIP in rather deplorable network condtions.. behind several layers of low-quality NAT routers, on 256kbps cable modems that are themselves behind more NAT, with the line pinned with downloads and uploads. yes, quality drops, yes, latency increases... yes if you really let things get shitty, it gets useless... but in general, it works great, and the flexibility and savings are awesome.
You can, yes.
You can also go outside and disconnect the POTS line if possible, just to make sure.
One word of caution.. don't hook up too many phones at once if you are doing this.... each phone you pick up (or that rings) (if the house is wired correctly) adds load to whatever is driving.. and if all that's driving is your little SIP box... you could fry it.
What value does Netscape bring over Mozilla?
I'm not arguing about open-vs-closed, or about stealing code, or anything like that....
My impression of past versions of netscape were "Hey, it's just like mozilla, except it has a bunch of annoying shit added to it."
We do know. Look at some of the methods for deriving PI, and it's obvious.
That's like saying "does 8/9 go on forever? How do we know?"
That is not beating the house. You are not playing against the house. The rake comes out no matter what.
If you are winning more than the rake, it just means someone else is losing it.
You aren't in any way winning it from the house, or beating the house.
Get it?
That's like saying "Oh I went to the movies, but I found $10 on the floor, so I beat the house"
That should be "Martingale" system.
The so-called infamous "Monte Carlo" method. When you lose, double your bets again.. eventually you will come out on top at some point.
True enough.. however.
- You need LOTS of cash, quicklky, to maintain this. The variance is huge.
- This "system" ignores table limits, which you will very quckly run into.
- You might hit 0/00, which would, well, really screw up the system.
They don't care if you count.. they only care if you count and win.
If you win consistantly, AND they can tell you are counting, then they can be reasonably certain you will continue to win indefinately, and so will bar you from the table.
If you consistantly win some other game, they may bar you from that, even if they are unsure how you are winning.
+1 for every 10/j/q/k/a that is played
-1 for every 2,3,4,5,6
ignore 7-8-9
Divide the count by a guess as to the # of decks left in the shoe... and then
bet higher on higher counts, bet low on lower counts.
It is impossible to beat the house playing poker in a casino poker room, because you aren't playing against the house in the first place.
Knowing pot odds is basic strategy, ever player should know. Poker is all about playing the poeple. The house does not factor into the equation at all.
Poker is in no way a game of luck, it only seems that way to the uninitiated. Getting a good hand is all luck, sure.. but the object of poker is not to win more hands, it's to win more money.
Except we live in a society where we recognize things like copyright, and distribution rights.
If we are saying "The law not withstanding" then anything else is moot.. we do not live in an anarchy, we live in a society of laws.
Snipped from some site:
The FCC regulations for Point to Multi-Point allows only 36 dBm (4 watts) EIRP. This is 30 dBm (1 watt) into a 6 dBi antenna. If you use a 10 dBi wireless antenna, you must limit your transmitter (or amplifier) to 26 dBm (10 + 26 = 36 dBm). For a 14 dBi panel wireless antenna, this allows a 22 dBm transmitter (or amplifier).
According to FCC regulations, 2.4 GHz Part 15.247 point-to-point transmitters may use a 30 dBm transmitter with a 6 dBi antenna. For a 3 dB increase in antenna gain, the transmitter power output must be reduced by 1 dB.
My comments below:
In Canada:
The maximum EIRP is 4 Watts for both point-to-point and multi-point networks with a maximum of 1 watt from the transmitter.
Meaning:
In the US, Point to point links have a distinct advantage.
I don't believe directionals are illegal.. there are still rules for how to deal wiht it.. it's just not as liberal as in the US.
Generally it's something like 3db of gain is permitted for each 1db drop in transmitter power.
So you can't just start throwing directionals off your 100mW transmitter.. you also have to attenuate it properly first.
This allows you to get directional gains, but keeps a sane limit on the total power.
Seems not to be a problem.
When the blimp is staying up via buoyancy, it's still in atmosphere by definition. If there is atmosphere of any sort, it's rather unlikely you will find high velocity paint chips or other things.. they would quickly slow down, burn up, etc.
When the blimp is OUT of the atmosphere, at orbital velocity, it is no longer staying up there via buoyancy, and puncturing it's gasbags would not really be an issue as far as staying up there goes.
For an individual, stripping out broadcast flags to make recordings you are legally allowed to make is not a crime.
Publishing the tools to do so may be under DMCA, though.
IT's not really like DirecTV... descrambling encrypted signals without permission falls into a different category than simply bypassing a trivial recording blocker... if you are descrambling DTV, you had no rights to view the material in the first place.
No... canada works just like the US. Local calls are free.
I meant long distance.
Also.. why does everyone say FWD covers the US? As far as I can tell, FWD only covers toll-free numbers and other FWD users, all VOIP. It doesn't have dialouts all over the US.
I've seen a number of medium sized businesses using asterisk, or planning to.
It's not just "some open source thing". It's solid. It's very well designed. And it is commercially support by the core developers if you want it to be. (www.digium.com)
Companies will tend to put their "mission critical" systems on stuff that works, open source or not. (Apache?)If they can pitch to the bosses this new VOIP product they can roll out for a couple thousand bucks instead of $50,000 or easily much more, most IT managers would say "That's worth a shot! Let's see how it goes."
That's just it though.. nobody is saying "no regulation".
Unlicensed is not the same thing as unregulated.
If you took a huge transmitter NOW and started doing wideband jamming... you'd be in deep shit. NO need to wait until the future when everything is UWB.
of a service offering unlimited calling to the US & Canada (the Canada part being significant here) that will work with asterisk?
Hint: Packet8 and Vonage will not.
Hint: Voicepulse works great, but only has calling in the US.
Of course.. I meant asterisk.
No matter how many times I type it, my fingers just won't listen sometimes.
My mother has a SIP phone (actually, a SIP adapter) at home.
So does my uncle.
So does my little sister.
So do a half dozen friends (spread out over several countries in both hemispheres).
All these SIP devices connect to a very small linux box colocated in the US, running asterix (which is an excellent piece of software, btw).
Through that, I issued everyone an extension, voicemail, etc.
Further to that, anyone who wants an account at iaxtel, free world dialup, voicepulse, well, the asterix box can connect to those for them, and route calls to the appropriate extensions. It can also share the outgoing services (Which may violate some TOS, who knows) among all the users (or selected ones).
I can also use end-user phone systems as dialin/out lines, which does require some slightly different adapters.
My point?
VOIP is not a heavyweight thing. The only big scary part is locating the correct parties... this is where POTS works well.. because we have a global dialplan that everyone agrees to.
Eventually, everyone with any bandwidth will just HAVE phone service to each other, with some kind of globally understood dialplan beneath it (which will not be based on numbers at all) and links back to POTS will be fewer and rarer.