What a great way to DoS yourself, with all the clueless morons out there running compromised versions of BlackICE you'd end up tying your incoming mta connections up (although I have a feeling your going to do something a bit more passive) or worse, end up getting complaints *from* the luser that you're trying to hax0r them.
Another observation, of the hosts I've spotted that were bounced by the SBL, I've rarely been able to scan them for open proxies. No ports open, nothing. Could be the firewall, or, is it possible that the viren only accept connections from a specific range of address space?
Asterisk, X100P "voice modem", NuFone for dirty-cheap calling and Vonage for North America wide calling.
NuFone is good for outgoing long distance calls. They charge in 15 second increments to many numbers (others are 30 or 60 seconds) and are pretty darned cheap compared to other providers.
I have great luck with Vonage for my local calling (North America, flat rate is like, $45 p/m and gets you all the dandy doodads). I also have Asterisk setup to receive faxes and Email them to me, so far no corrupted pages at all and the bandwidth usage is pretty reasonable.
I have this setup on my Asterisk box (Vonage attaches using an X100P card ($100 from Digium for the real-thing, clones have been spotted for cheap including $0.99 but YMMV), NuFone is native IAX).
Cordless phone is attached using a Grandstream Ata-286, so I can wonder around the house with a cordless headset whilst talking to who-ever using VoIP.
and don't forget to register your number on e164.org, for native voip;)
I understand that you recognize the authority of the ITU over country codes and the authority of the FCC over US area codes. Is that correct?
You know, not everything has to be a regulatory issue. The ITU is the International Telecommunication Union, there's no way around that.
We're not interested in compromising the integrity of a numbering system unnecessarily, I'd be pissed if someone re-directed my number too.
In case both e164.org and e164.arpa contain records for the same phone number, will you remove your records to reestablish unambiguity? In other words, will you technically enforce your role as a supplemental registry?
That's what we're doing.
Pulver wouldn't be able to put it into +1 393, unless they actually own the number.
E164.org is not a free-for-all, you have to prove you own the number before you can stuff it into the zone.
From what I remember of AlterNIC, anyone could register sco.
It's a configuration thing, use.arpa primarily and fall back to.org.
Try it now, you won't get many hits from.arpa.
Like wise you can go with.org, and use.arpa if it doesn't exist.
No, E164.org is not an Alternic.
We are not serving a domain called "e164.arpa", we're providing a suplemental domain called "e164.org" that can be used *in*conjunction* with e164.arpa. Using it is no different from using your own enum root for a local dial plan, or FWD using ENUM for their non-PSTN numbers.
Secondly, AlterNIC suffers from an ownernship problem. E164.org actually verifies PSTN numbers to avoid conflicts like this.
Thirdly, e164.arpa is not in production. There are no records for +1 (North America). Sure some people have it for experimentation, but e164.org is live and live NOW.
. However, I would want to see an organization with a little more clout behind them before I'd ever consider putting any time or money into an alternate root service; don't be surprised if suddenly you see a "cost recovery" (cough, cough, , cough) charge for usage.
If you even bothered to look at our site you'd know that we do ask for donations, because some areas are more expensive than others to verify. You can't expect us to foot the bill for a $9 per minute charge to Tuvalu or INMARSAT.
For the most part verifications are free (and we let people do up to 5), after that, we ask for a donation. I think that's pretty reasonable.
Nothing's wrong with ENUM, E164.org is an ENUM provider.:)
The real question is what's wrong with e164.arpa. The answer, well. They don't already provide phone# service mapping via DNS, at least not in production.
The beauty of having a DNS root like e164.org is that calls can be entirely peer to peer.
You're not sending all of your voice traffic through a single upstream like Vonage or Free World Dialup.
If you ring my number, your local voip gateway connects directly with mine. Sure, if there's a hit on my local network or yours, then there will be lag issues. Alas that is the nature of the 'net.
Slashdot Mirror
That's an awefully nice value-added service. It would be good to see other ISPs doing this as well.
with inverted back/foreground colour. :)
Another observation, of the hosts I've spotted that were bounced by the SBL, I've rarely been able to scan them for open proxies. No ports open, nothing. Could be the firewall, or, is it possible that the viren only accept connections from a specific range of address space?
ctrl-alt-fX works in X, when your at the regular console, just use alt-. I find it's usually alt-f7 but it depends on how your ttys are setup.
The answer, is basically, no. Or rather, not yet.
some would say there isn't enough information control in America, but then again, at least we're free to turn off the TV ;)
NuFone is good for outgoing long distance calls. They charge in 15 second increments to many numbers (others are 30 or 60 seconds) and are pretty darned cheap compared to other providers.
I have great luck with Vonage for my local calling (North America, flat rate is like, $45 p/m and gets you all the dandy doodads). I also have Asterisk setup to receive faxes and Email them to me, so far no corrupted pages at all and the bandwidth usage is pretty reasonable.
I have this setup on my Asterisk box (Vonage attaches using an X100P card ($100 from Digium for the real-thing, clones have been spotted for cheap including $0.99 but YMMV), NuFone is native IAX).
Cordless phone is attached using a Grandstream Ata-286, so I can wonder around the house with a cordless headset whilst talking to who-ever using VoIP.
and don't forget to register your number on e164.org, for native voip ;)
This is an incumbment free zone
In case both e164.org and e164.arpa contain records for the same phone number, will you remove your records to reestablish unambiguity? In other words, will you technically enforce your role as a supplemental registry? That's what we're doing.
Pulver wouldn't be able to put it into +1 393, unless they actually own the number. E164.org is not a free-for-all, you have to prove you own the number before you can stuff it into the zone. From what I remember of AlterNIC, anyone could register sco.
It's a configuration thing, use .arpa primarily and fall back to .org.
Try it now, you won't get many hits from .arpa.
Like wise you can go with .org, and use .arpa if it doesn't exist.
No, E164.org is not an Alternic. We are not serving a domain called "e164.arpa", we're providing a suplemental domain called "e164.org" that can be used *in*conjunction* with e164.arpa. Using it is no different from using your own enum root for a local dial plan, or FWD using ENUM for their non-PSTN numbers. Secondly, AlterNIC suffers from an ownernship problem. E164.org actually verifies PSTN numbers to avoid conflicts like this. Thirdly, e164.arpa is not in production. There are no records for +1 (North America). Sure some people have it for experimentation, but e164.org is live and live NOW. . However, I would want to see an organization with a little more clout behind them before I'd ever consider putting any time or money into an alternate root service; don't be surprised if suddenly you see a "cost recovery" (cough, cough, , cough) charge for usage. If you even bothered to look at our site you'd know that we do ask for donations, because some areas are more expensive than others to verify. You can't expect us to foot the bill for a $9 per minute charge to Tuvalu or INMARSAT. For the most part verifications are free (and we let people do up to 5), after that, we ask for a donation. I think that's pretty reasonable.
Nothing's wrong with ENUM, E164.org is an ENUM provider. :)
The real question is what's wrong with e164.arpa. The answer, well. They don't already provide phone# service mapping via DNS, at least not in production.
No, they didn't. The only reason I linked to them is to illustrate the point of how low-cost VoIP solutions can be.
DNS SRV records will do that. _sip._udp.yourdomain.com. 3600 IN SRV 0 0 5060 sip.yourdomain.com. well, it's not exactly what you're suggesting.. Hmm..
You sure about that? Last time I looked, they didn't allow re-invites.
The beauty of having a DNS root like e164.org is that calls can be entirely peer to peer. You're not sending all of your voice traffic through a single upstream like Vonage or Free World Dialup. If you ring my number, your local voip gateway connects directly with mine. Sure, if there's a hit on my local network or yours, then there will be lag issues. Alas that is the nature of the 'net.
Set up Asterisk to try an EnumLookup first, then fall back to NuFone or your home landline using a $16 X100P WinModem from DigitNetworks.
Get all your friends to register their phone numbers with E164.org too, it's a free ENUM service that also verifies people's numbers.
Then if you're really feeling groovy, help a local Community Wireless Network deploy an 802.11a backbone with 11g hotspots all over the place ;)
Works great with Asterisk and serexpress. :)