Internet, VoIP, Video, Peering, and Future Technologies

Project- Classified Ads System

2010-05-17T08:50:00.000-07:00

Go to Full Story
Filed under: Uncategorized — Mark
May 14, 2010@6:58 am

Recently, Teknogeekz got involved in something that was somewhat out of the normal comfort zone, a Classified Advertising System for Banderenews.com. The system can be seen at www.pvshopper.com.

In the past they had manually posted all classifieds as HTML. As the demand for classified ads seemed to be growing, that task was becoming more and more time consuming.

We started with a low cost off the shelf script and have applied some customizations...

Free Calls to USA and Canada; Part 1

2010-05-17T08:45:00.000-07:00

Go to Full Story

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: free phone calls, IPkall, SIP, VoIP, Voxalot — Mark

May 7, 2010 @ 9:38 pm

This is part 1 of a guide on how to get a free USA number from the city of your choice and to make free web activated phone calls to the USA and Canada. You also get free text messages to all cell phones in USA, Canada, and Mexico, advanced voice mail, and more.

This Blog will not be updated further!

2010-05-07T21:11:00.000-07:00

This blog has now been moved to

http://www.teknogeekz.com/blog

Older posts will remain here, however all newer posts will appear there.

Hope to see you there!

Free is a Very Good Price

2009-11-13T11:16:00.000-08:00

This is more a mindless free flowing rant than anything real, as I have posted nothing for a while, I wanted to make a post, but my recent situation with a series of ailing computers and ISP issues I have not had the luxury to post. At least it may give you some clues of what I have been up to lately. I admit it's a little scattered and perhaps wacky, but if you do not like it there is always the address bar on your web browser. I think if you make it to the end, it comes full circle.

“Free is a very good Price” is what my old buddy Tom would have said, along with “It's worth the trip, or “The happy place to buy”. Tom would advertise on late night television and was always trying to sell TVs, Stereos and furniture. Often times he had a gift with the purchase, or would make burgers in the parking lot, thus the "Free is a very good price". Many of the TVs he once sold were like pieces of furniture. You expected to get several years out of it. Some had nice hardwood cabinets, and if they needed repair, a guy came to you and fixed it, while you suffered looking at his crack hanging out the back of his pants. If this guy goes around with his crack hanging out is he really smart enough to fix my TV? Well he most always did! Later Tom's TVs went to more portable packages and later more disposable. The era of in home TV repair died, as the era for the home TV repairman, but we will not miss the crack. It became cheaper to replace than to repair. More on this later...

Over the last several months I have been using quite a mix of PC, Mac, and Linux. As if that were not enough within those three OSes, I have used at least two different versions of each of those in the last few months. Each OS has its ups and downs , but I am very much leaning towards Ubuntu Linux as the clear winner, especially on the x86 architecture! Second on my Linux list I would have to say is CentOS5 I guess that is the geek in me talking. I also place Windows far above the Mac, mostly for free tools downloads on the PC, whereas the Mac I must pay for the software. I found the Mac OS to be more and more Linux Like the more I got into it though.

So how have I survived this flurry of operating systems and computers the last several months?

OpenOffice offers file compatibility with Microsoft Office, and is available for every major operating system, such as Windows, Mac, and Linux. So now not only is it free, I remember not long ago, when we had trouble reading a Mac floppy on a PC to transfer files and nowadays you can have Open office on all of the aforementioned and more.

Now look at the networks, and look how far we have come from Arcnet, and localtalk to the more common networks attained today which include WiFi, power-line, and home phone line networking. Not to mention that the systems and software allow us to seamlessly communicate across platforms, and architectures. Most of my files are saved to a NAS or a thumb drive these days. My computer can totally crash tomorrow and I have my data on the NAS ready for whatever Operating System I plug in!

Oh and that is if you can not deal with the complexities of using a memory stick! Today, we carry around 8 Gig thumb drives. I remember my first hard disk was 20 Meg full height 5 and 1/4 inch hard disk drive, and I was so sad that I could not afford the sleeker sexier half height 40 Meg hard disk!

While mentioning thumb drives and NAS devices I will take a minute to mention portable applications for Windows. They are great to continue working with all of the same programs when you change from one windows computer to another. These applications contain all the necessary support files in the application folder. No installation required.

So where is all of this going? I was hoping someone could tell me that! I remember only a few years ago I wanted that new wingding for my computer. Whatever it was, today I see them on ebay for a fraction of the original selling price. Next year someone will clean it out of their closet, because it operates at a fraction of the speed of the newer models, or the interface was phased out. I mean why use a 5 ¼ inch 20 Meg Hard Disk when you could use an 8 Gig thumb drive? What do I do with it?

It is all going right in the dumpster!

So I take a moment to ask all consumers across the globe to go green. All of this stuff we are throwing away contaminates the environment by leaving plastics and lead and more around. Consumers drive most markets, so where there is demand it will be filled. I mean we all wanted the Star Trek Communicator apparently and then we got the Motorola StarTac. Today, nobody wants one of those old Motorola StarTacs! What will it be next year? When will it end? Who will clean up the mess of the earth that this technological revolution is causing? The manufacturers and retailers need to start accepting more social responsibility to mother earth. Consumers should realize too that going green is more than taking your own bag to Wal Mart. Also, that we should activate against the disposable society that we have created and avoid messy toxic waste for our children. We must create a greener consumer demand in the marketplace and frown on disposable consumer products, and shun the disposable products. Do I care if my print server is only 10Mb/s or MUST I upgrade it to Gigabit Ethernet? With the technology today why is it not entirely firmware upgradeable?

MAN I GOTTA THROW AWAY ALL THESE DEAD COMPUTERS!

How much is too much, Wifi, Bluetooth, wireless video and more

2009-07-01T08:30:00.000-07:00

I often see that people are very quick to add new wireless components such as WiFi and Bluetooth components to their existing systems.

I think that most users are unaware of the dangers in using such devices and perhaps should adopt an attitude of "less is better". If you look at the average modern home you may find WiFi, Bluetooth, wireless video, cordless phones, and more, and when someone wants a new component they always look to those that support wireless. Although it may sound sexy and keep you free of wire clutter, one of the most important considerations is your family's health. With every new wireless component you increase the Electromagnetic radiation in your home. With that increase you increase the probability that it will affect your health.

I do not want a cell phone with a bluetooth headset on my body. The effects of the cell phone alone are dangerous. Now with that add the radiation of the bluetooth and you have a new risk.

In your home network you may think that that new wireless NAS is sexy, but did you know that that NAS can be anywhere on your network including, a wired segment , and still pass the contents of that NAS over EXISTING wireless infrastructure, such as your router? You need not use a wireless NAS.

I have been asked by some as to adding such components, who do not clearly understand this and "think wireless" for all components. The physical location of a NAS probably has little importance, so why do you need wireless? Aside from that you will most probably get far better performance from wired components.

next time think about how that new wireless gadget may have on your health or longevity. keep in M ind that the manufacturers have little regard for your health, nor dpoes the salesman that will try to up-sell you to that costlier wireless model, even though it may offer zero benefit in your installation in the end.

In my opinion I do not want my computers emanating WiFi and bluetooth RF radiation as I sit by my cell phone that also emanates electromagnetic radiation. I am not talking about just for you, as perhaps you have small children in your home, who may be even more gravely affec ted by sjuch RF energey.

The Bleeding Edge

2009-02-12T16:45:00.000-08:00

As time goes on, I come to realize more and more, that I always seem to look for solutions on the bleeding edge.

I am currently looking for the following solutions that do not seem to yet exist!

A USB device that allows me to take a Single USB drive and share it with the USB ports on two computers. I am NOT looking to network the machines, over USB or otherwise. It seems re4asonable that in this day and age such a solution would already exist, but it does not. Why would I want this? Well Imagine a USB drive connected simultaneously to your computer and to the USB port of a DIVX compatible DVD player. As you write a file from the computer, you may stream audio to your stero from the same USB hard drive. Alternately you may connect to a USB network device such as the Linksys SLUG , while connected to your DVD player.This may also be incorporated to a USB hard disk case to allow simultaneous access from two host controllers. This may be easier if one device is tagged as "read only" as in the case of the DIVX compatible DVD.
A "Smart" USB to Ethernet adapter. What this Ethernet adapter does is emulates a hard disk from a Windows or NFS network. It is reasonable that it would need some kind of a programming interface such as a mini web server to configure network parameters; Workgroup and shares to connect to, or perhaps with a utility through the USB port. This would also be useful on one of those DIVX compatible DVD players to stream DIVX video to your TV or MP3s to your stereo system via a DVD players USB port (which works only with a USB Disk)
Accessible HDTV modulator / Encoder. I mean a simple device that can take a HDMI or similar signal and produce a HD modulated "TV Channel" that can be used with the built in tuner on an HD TV. Ideally this would allow several to be used on different channels. There are many CCTV systems that will be undergoing upgrades in the years to come.

I place these items here and hope that someone may comment about anything that thry may know of!

Fun with DIVX and XVID, and torrents

2009-02-07T23:05:00.000-08:00

I am a big fan of DIVX , in fact I paid for the full DIVX encoder. About a year ago, I acquired some Hard Disk Media Players that I just love. They play back DIVX files, and XVID as it is a clone of DIVX. These devices have allowed me to keep my original DVDs stored away, where they do not get touched. With DIVX, I can compress the videos down to a reasonable size and maintain video quality. My dabbling with this and other devices has led me to this Post.

Lately I have downloaded some TV series and movies and I see the same issues arise. (See my feelings on legality below).

Frame Rates and Program Length
Consistently, I see that programs that should be about 44 minutes in length with commercials cut out, often play back at 40 minutes in length. I pondered this problem a lot, and as a former television technician, I reasonably sure that 44 minutes or so constitutes 1 hour with commercial breaks.
Here is what I finally concluded.... There is a process called 3/2 pull down, where a 24 FPS film is converted to roughly 30 FPS (by inserting an occasional "extra" frame) when transferred to video in North America (NTSC). There is a similar process used in PAL however I have not done all the math exactly, but I did do enough math to identify the problem. Some software, or the users of software, are removing these extra frames. This is not unusual and is a good idea to reduce file size. The problem lies in that the file still is playing back at 25 FPS, not the 24 that it should play back at. Most of these files originated from PAL systems I can tell due to the PAL video sizes. The most annoying part of this problem is that sometimes it is noticeable that the dialog, and motion, on such ripped programs seems hurried. I remember the advent and discussions of a device called the Lexicon in the 80s which performed a similar function for broadcasters and allowed them to pack more commercials in a 1 hour program. I can not emphasize to all of you DVD rippers enough that you need to keep the proper frame rate, which should reflect whether the pulldown was removed or not. If so, the resulting video is 24 FPS , not 25 FPS, and definitely not 30 FPS, as this affects the playback duration and presents the content in a hurried format.

Aspect Ratio and Cropping
I know there are given aspect ratio "standards" but I have seen some home rippers making some serious mistakes. I do not worry about "proper" resolutions so much, as long as the aspect is correct. I recently downloaded some files for testing via torrents. Now in the case of one film in particular , every copy I found had the same butchering to it when it came to aspect ratio. That file which you can find easily is the 1994 film "The Little Rascals" . It was butchered because when downloaded from a torrent, it is in a 16x9 aspect ratio. Hhowever, the DVD that it was ripped from apparently was 4x3, so it was cropped when ripped. The bad part about that is that it was already cropped when presented in 4x3 and cropping it again yields only a fraction of the original frame. When I downloaded and viewed this file it looked very odd to me, although the quality was good tops of heads were frequently cut off, so I connected the old VHS and started comparing my old 4x3 aspect VHS tape of this movie with the downloaded 16x9 version. I should see more on the sides of the 16x9 from , however in this case I see less of the top and bottom. Clearly that file on the torrents (700.18 Meg) was from a 4x3 aspect DVD then cropped to 16x9. This is a horrible mistake for anyone ripping DVDs!

Comments about my downloads
I want to clarify that my downloads were for testing purposes, and all downloads were of movies that I already own original media. Since I do own original media, I do not feel that I am infringing on copyrights by downloading a back - up copy.

Internet Peering in Mexico - What happens in Mexico should stay in Mexico!

2009-01-15T22:36:00.000-08:00

Well after having written the previous post a year ago about Internet peering in Mexico, even more bad news has come to light.

After having tried to use Telecable in Puerto Vallarta, and Telecable in Zapopan for a specific use that would connect two locations together, we see the following

ping -t 201.130.248.XXX

Pinging 201.130.248.XXX with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=344ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=343ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=413ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=303ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=299ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=309ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=49
Reply from 201.130.248.XX: bytes=32 time=353ms TTL=49

First Packet Loss! Second We see that there is EXCESSIVE latency caused by Protel who chose to ignore the issue because I was not their client directly! Not to mention this example all data goes from Mexico to USA TWICE! First to Level3 then to McAllen Texas via Protel. There is also 200ms of Latency between Laredo and Monterrey!

1 8 ms 7 ms 7 ms 200-56-193-1-cable.cybercable.net.mx [200.56.193.1]
2 43 ms 69 ms 79 ms 148.243.116.10
3 71 ms 84 ms 98 ms dial-200-57-215-25.zone-3.dial.net.mx [200.57.215.25]
4 101 ms 89 ms 63 ms 148.245.252.217
5 84 ms 68 ms 69 ms dial-200-39-230-53.zone-1.dial.net.mx [200.39.230.53]
6 118 ms * 68 ms 200.33.208.129
7 116 ms 108 ms 107 ms pos6/0.rr1.torixt.avantel.net.mx [200.33.208.201]
8 117 ms 93 ms 102 ms 200.33.208.150
9 100 ms 119 ms 99 ms na-224-21.na.avantel.net.mx [148.245.224.21]
10 128 ms 133 ms * so-8-1.car2.Houston1.Level3.net [4.79.90.97]
11 116 ms 118 ms 131 ms ae-2-5.bar2.Houston1.Level3.net [4.69.132.238]
12 130 ms 102 ms 96 ms ae-0-11.bar1.Houston1.Level3.net [4.69.137.133]
13 72 ms 50 ms 76 ms ae-13-13.ebr1.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.137.138]
14 117 ms 141 ms 113 ms ae-71-71.csw2.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.136.126]
15 123 ms 104 ms 137 ms ae-2-79.edge2.Dallas3.Level3.net [4.68.19.76]
16 128 ms 134 ms 137 ms Tiscali-Level3.Dallas3.Level3.net [4.68.110.158]
17 109 ms * 91 ms protel-inext-gw.ip.tiscali.net [77.67.68.146]
18 91 ms 106 ms 121 ms ge-0-0-0.core01-lar.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.45]
19 293 ms 309 ms 300 ms as-1.core01-mty.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.109]
20 354 ms * 343 ms po-5-0.inext01-slp.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.230]
21 346 ms 328 ms * po-4-0.core01-ira.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.237]
22 334 ms 327 ms 352 ms po-1-0.core01-mcallen.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.225]
23 * 341 ms 365 ms po-2-1.core01-gdl.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.143.90]
24 348 ms 313 ms 287 ms 134.142.52.200.static.redip.inext.net.mx [200.52.142.134]
25 * * * Request timed out.
26 * * * Request timed out.
27 * 319 ms * 201-130-248-XX-cable.cybercable.net.mx [201.130.248.XX]
28 310 ms 311 ms 296 ms 201-130-248-XX-cable.cybercable.net.mx [201.130.248.XX]

Trace complete.

What an embarrassment!

___________________________________________
UPDATE JAN 17, 2009

Here is the biggest lie that LACNIC could make
http://www.lacnic.net/documentos/lacnicxi/presentaciones/peeringmexico.ppt

GO ahead check it out. Then see the traceroute above and know that Inext refers to Protel that supposedly does peering with Telmex IN MEXICO according to that document. Furthermore here is more proof, and know that this traceroute is from Guadalajara TO Guadalajara.

traceroute to 187.140.21.XXX (187.140.21.XXX), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 10.206.0.1 (10.206.0.1) 10.468 ms 10.491 ms 10.483 ms
2 10.255.255.1 (10.255.255.1) 183.849 ms 184.379 ms 184.971 ms
3 router.cybercable.net.mx (200.53.250.10) 184.142 ms 184.734 ms 184.402 ms
4 45.142.52.200.static.redip.inext.net.mx (200.52.142.45) 185.121 ms 186.734 ms 186.383 ms
5 * * *
6 ge-0-0.core02-lar.redip.inext.net.mx (200.52.143.46) 221.606 ms 260.877 ms 276.338 ms
7 xe-3-1-0-102.dal11.ip.tiscali.net (77.67.68.145) 284.812 ms 284.631 ms 28 5.410 ms
8 xe-2-0-0.sjc10.ip.tiscali.net (89.149.187.189) 310.528 ms 310.724 ms 311. 439 ms
9 xe-0.equinix.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (206.223.116.12) 311.433 ms 311.43 5 ms 311.118 ms
10 as-0.r20.lsanca03.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (129.250.4.97) 321.067 ms 321.714 ms 321.788 ms
11 * * *
12 xe-7-1.r01.lsanca03.us.ce.gin.ntt.net (204.1.253.70) 267.349 ms 267.482 ms 268.159 ms
13 dsl-187-140-21-XXX.prod-infinitum.com.mx (187.140.21.167) 314.538 ms 323.7 40 ms 311.758 ms

Why does LACNIC think we are so stupid? This problem is getting WORSE, NOT BETTER, and it has only been one year since my last post on this topic.

Here is one last bit of proof that there is really no peering IN MEXICO regardless of what the lie of the day is at LACNIC
1 9 ms 7 ms 8 ms 200-56-193-1-cable.cybercable.net.mx [200.56.193.1]
2 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms 148.243.116.10
3 79 ms 72 ms 62 ms dial-200-57-215-25.zone-3.dial.net.mx [200.57.215.25]
4 13 ms 13 ms 16 ms 148.245.252.217
5 26 ms 23 ms 38 ms dial-200-39-230-53.zone-1.dial.net.mx [200.39.230.53]
6 55 ms 60 ms 101 ms 200.33.208.129
7 46 ms 46 ms 46 ms SAT1.ALTER.NET [63.65.121.165]
8 44 ms 45 ms 46 ms 0.so-4-1-0.XL4.SAT1.ALTER.NET [152.63.97.194]
9 104 ms 112 ms * 0.so-7-0-0.XT2.LAX7.ALTER.NET [152.63.115.237]
10 82 ms 82 ms 80 ms GigabitEthernet7-0-0.GW7.LAX7.ALTER.NET [152.63.118.53]
11 75 ms 73 ms 76 ms telmex-gw.customer.alter.net [157.130.246.70]
12 76 ms 77 ms 74 ms iadsl-jal-bandera-16-ge7-0-0.uninet.net.mx [201.125.11.240]
13 126 ms 135 ms 109 ms dsl-187-140-21-XXX.prod-infinitum.com.mx [187.140.21.XXX]

The peering here again also seems to be in USA.'

I welcome a reply from LACNIC on this subject.

_________________________________________________

UPDATE January 29, 1009

LACNIC replied and the complete response is in the comments section, as well as my follow up. The short version is that apparently the powerpoint document referenced is not an official LACNIC document. I must then ask, why then is it posted on the LACNIC web site?

Secondly, The document refers to "ISP Peering in Mexico", not "Mexican ISP Peering in the USA" The difference again is the latency and at least one of the traceroutes shows that data is apparently being handed off in the USA between Mexican ISPs. It does therefore NOT qualify as "ISP Peering in Mexico", although may involve Mexican ISPs peering in the USA.

Thirdly, the peering diagram on page 6 also does not involve PURELY ISP peering. A closer look at those companies indicates that most, if not all are involved in telephone traffic. Now that more providers are using VoIP those "private connections" are more suitable for telephone traffic as they are more direct than sending the traffic to the internet. ^The latency involved , and unknown variables of the internet (via other connections) are less desirable, so naturally those ISPS (really meaning telcos) are filling those private connections to full capacity with telephone calls, and leaving little or no capacity for real dedicated internet peering.

I think a good possible solution is that some neutral organization needs to be created and ANY Licensed internet provider should be REQUIRED to interconnect through this independent third party in a major city such as Guadalajara or Mexico DF. Monterrey is too far to the north for most users in Mexico in my opinion. These mandatory internet connections should NOT BE USED FOR INTRA-CARRIER TELEPHONE TRAFFIC! Instead, they should be pure internet peering, and may be used for intra-carrier telephone traffic, only when saturated less than 50% to BOTH carriers involved. For example, if the bestel connection was at 80% average and the Avantel was at 40% Avantel should not send traffic to Bestel through this new peering route. If BOTH however were at 30% , then they may saturate it with internet and telephone traffic up to 70% however giving priority to INTERNET traffic, and use their own direct interconnections for telephone peering.

The example of these "peering" connections, is a perfect example of the types of conflicts of interests that hold Mexico back , and are ridden with the anti-competitive attitudes. This backward thinking should not hold back the evolution of the internet in Mexico and we should take steps to ensure that internet growth and performance in Mexico is more controlled. To do this the assistance of COFETEL and/or SCT will be necessary to make new requirements to ensure proper growth of the internet IN MEXICO as internet demand increases IN MEXICO. AT the same time, this new independent organization should also begin to interconnect internationally where necessary, specifically making more direct international connections that do not rely on sending traffic destined to Argentina via the USA. With this new philosophy we can give Mexico its own internet backbone, and Mexico can begin to lead the way in offering internet solutions such as hosting FROM MEXICO for all of Latin America, as well as serve as a robust gateway for traffic destined for the USA. Mexico makes an appropriate "internet gateway" to the USA from the rest of Latin America for it's physical proximity to the USA.

This all goes along with another one of my beliefs : WE AS MEXICANS, should not look to go where life is better, but to make MEXICO a better place to live!

________________________________________________________________________________
UPDATE February 1, 2009

After making this post and ranting about these problems with Protel, LACNIC, Telecable, and many others this page as received visits from many of those organizations, and I am happy to report that the situation has improved. By my most recent tests on the Telecable Puerto Vallarta / Telecable Guadalajara connection show an average of about 150ms. Previously it was twice that! I can say however I have not performed a single traceroute that showed domestic peering to date. I have seen Mexican providers peering, but those connections appear to be in the USA, which is not "Mexico Peering" .

I also want to point out that a part of this Telecable issue stems from the fact that they use one provider in Guadalajara and another in Puerto Vallarta and have none of their own infrastructure between those two cities, to keep data from Telecable to Telecable on their own network. Instead they route it to the respective providers in each city, who route it to the USA and back to Mexico again. EVERY licensed provider that operates in multiple cities should be required to have their own infrastructure for data from their network to their network, or they are only contributing to the problem.

VoLAN and WiFi Can create some exciting possibilities

2009-01-02T08:26:00.000-08:00

Recently I had the opportunity to devise a sysyem for VoLAN (Voice over LAN) to offer a very unique solution.

The details of the project can be found at:
http://www.teknogeekz.com/RemoteDoorWifiSIP.htm , however I have posted a basic diagram below.

The project employed a unique device from Cyberdata which is a doorbell intercom. The wireless router shown is an over-simplification of the extensive Wireless Network that was already on site. Clearly the applications for SIP are growing when we begin to see devices available that have such limited, although useful applications such as the CyberData Intercom. What impressed me more however was the QuickPhones WiFI Handset , specifically it's Peer to Peer mode.

Part of the reason why this was such a good solution was the existing WiFi infrastructure that gave us better coverage than any long range cordless phone would have.

Since these devices were not relying on a server, we used P2P mode. The QuickPhones offers a P2P mode that allows IP address dialing via it's Phone book feature. This allowed us to set up multiple destinations instead of a "hotline" from the WiFi phone. This gave us the unexpected but much appreciated possibility of having more than one destination accessible from the WiFi handset. With a system like this one can easily establish intercom and possible PBX like functionality with no server, even with the functionality of PSTN lines via a device like an SPA 3102.

In the coming months I hope to have more time to explore such possibilities, and if any readers have any comments on the P2P functionality of the Quickphones , I would like to hear comments.

2008 The Year We Peer II

2008-09-21T13:32:00.000-07:00

On January 2, 2008 , I posted here in this BLOG entry "2008 The Year We Peer"

Although I had thought little about this over the last several months, I now see that it is a vision that almost immediately began to come true. The truth is I had a very strong sensation that I needed to write that entry and quickly, even though I was involved in a move. Now I can say that rather than being embarrassed when the end of 2008 arrives, I can now proudly say that I hit the nail squarely on the head. SKOOKUM!

Sometime later in January , apparently Gizmo / SIPPhone announced Gizmo5 , and Gizmo5 "Backdoor Dialing". I did not think too much about this , nor look into it too deeply. In fact, I figured it was just more hype. However what I have found is that truly SIPPhone is offering FREE calls via Peering, and not just to VoIP providers. This even seems to include for example any Qwest number in Portland, Oregon. Unfortunately they play a "Free Call" recording on these calls, but the calls seem to connect with high quality.

Also since publishing that Blog entry, I originally took the announcement of an annual charge from Freeworlddialup.com to be bad news. As it turns out is WONDERFUL news for peering. They have apparently come to realize the value of their association with Ipeerx, also a Pulver Company. A year ago I was "backdooring" into FWD to get access to all Packet8 and Broadvoice numbers. I even asked the question of Jeff Pulver about people exploiting available services on FWD which could potentially break FWD. I did not tell him about backdooring these calls into the FWD network, as I did not want to ruin a good thing. In fact I wrote a BLOG entry in December 2007 and the tests I referred to there were done through FWD. Jeff, do you read my BLOG? If so you now know what I was talking about in my message about "disruptive technology".

If you build it, they will come!

I think in the case of both of these services, they seem to lack a "lookup" service to find out easily if a number is in the database, much like ENUM. In Fact users of Asterisk could use this same kind of lookup to easily interface these wonderful service offerings into their products.

Presenting Colonel or Kernel Panic

2008-09-19T09:30:00.001-07:00

Well, I must say who can spend months working with linux without the opportunity to be presented to "Kernel Panic"?

For those interested I present the world with what appears to be the first and only Colonel Panic

Mark

Linux; Unbuntu, OpenSUSE, CentOS

2008-08-24T22:16:00.000-07:00

It has been a frustrating week!

My previous attempts at Linux installs have all been met with failure for one reason or another.

Although this week, I have succeeded at a few different distros, the remaining problem is then getting the application one needs to work. For instance in my Cent OS on i386 I had no problem with hamachi, it was the GUI I could not get to work. I also dis a PPC install of Ubuntu and found that NO VERSION HAMACHI WOULD INSTALL SUCCESSFULLY, until I gave up! In each case there was always something else I needed installed to install the program I needed to use. The package managers were of Little Help, such as when I looked for gtk+ 2.0 In the Synaptic Package manager for Ubuntu, I had to sort through over 100 results and most seemed irrelevant. Keep in mind I had to do this several times to even attempt the installation of hamachi!

OpenSUSE on the PPC platform from the mini ISO was a complete failure despite many, many attempts.

I think someone should make some standards for Linux Distros to ensure programs will install without installing 10 dependencies along the way! In that way a user can download a program with the full knowledge that they will not be relying on a post on a forum to hopefully get a geek to answer their question a week later.

Although I can say that Ubuntu seems to have won my heart for the included packages that can be easily installed, it is a far cry from Windows or any Mac OS, and fails with advanced applications like Hamachi, or any third party program that supposedly runs on linux.

My opinion on Linux, it is great for getting an OS on an older machine, but so is Windows 2000, and there is no nightmare with the installation of Java, and All of the necessary web browser plug ins. I suppose it is a matter of the value of ones' time however I can say Linux in general for me has been one of the biggest time wasters I have seen. I need to employ cutting edge applications and I can not identify and install 10 different packages to install the program I need. Let alone whatever problems arise after the installation of said program.

Linux is good for playing, or a dedicated server, with, but I see it as little competition for Microsoft or Apple in the desktop OS market, as it is still Kludgeware. If you can not install the programs you need, forget it.

CODECs , Micro-CODECs , and still more CODECs

2008-06-22T21:14:00.000-07:00

I frequently find myself in discussions about CODECs and call quality. It seems that many people have little understanding of CODECs , and even fewer have a good understanding of CODEC translation or what may REALLY be happening when they send out a micro-CODEC such as GSM or ilbc from their asterisk box, softphone or ATA.

This is mostly a translation from an old post that I made in Spanish on the subject.

The majority of carries support some flavor of g711 and g729. Therefore , when a person sends a call in a CODEC such as g723, GSM or ilbc, it is more probably they will have CODEC translation occur in the chain of that call.

Does not matter? You think so? Really huh....

Your provider offers g723, g729 and g711 for example. You want to use ilbc. Your asterisk can translate CODECS, because you are thinking more of saving bandwidth, you send calls to your provider via g723. Perhaps what you do not understand is that your provider is going to translate that call from the G723 that you send to g729 or g711 before sending it to the PSTN.

In the example above , you can see that the call will have a couple of different stages of CODEC translation. One very important thing to understand is always to use the most common CODECs. You must think of each stage of CODEC translation in the ENTIRE chain, not just on your end. If your call happens to be to a GSM cell phone you call will later also be CODEC translated again to some flavor of GSM, adding yet another step of CODEC translation.

It is better to use CODECs that your provider can support up to the gateway, with no translation, but when that is not possible, you should NEVER translate from a micro-CODEC to a micro-CODEC, unless you are sure that your privider is not translating again later in the chain. The only CODECs that are not micro-CODECs are g711 u (ulaw , or PCMU) and g711a (alaw or PCMA). Also Micro-CODECs have an inherent higher level of latency, are more greatly affected by packet loss and jitter, and every CODEC translation in the chain adds more latency still.

If a person or company tells you they offer "Carrier Class Services" , they should offer g711a or g711u, or it is simply not carrier class. They are the only CODECs that offer the same quality as the PSTN.

Keep in mind, each micro-CODEC adds its own unique set of distortions, artifacts, and errors in the voice quality. If you go through two micro-CODECs , the call may have such poor quality it can be unintelligible.

E.164 numbering plan, what about E.164 dial tone?

2008-05-08T08:04:00.000-07:00

First I will say, for those that do not know, E.164 dialing is non – country specific dialing. On traditional systems, to place an international call from the UK you dial 00, whereas from the

USA

you dial 011. Of course each country has its’ own set of dial and call progress tones. E.164 dialing can begin with + such as on a GSM cell phone, but when dialing from traditional equipment the + is not an option so it s dropped, and dialing begins with the country code

Dial tone not only tells us the phone is ready to dial, but reminds us how to dial 011 or 00 as well as a unique set of call progress tones for busy, ringing, reorder, etc., by country.

It only makes sense. You go to England, or any other country, and you hear the country specific dial tone.

Now we have non-country specific E.164 dialing, so why not a dial tone that tells us that is the expected dial plan?

It makes perfect sense. The caller knows by the dial tone how he/she needs to dial “001” or simply “1” to start.

I therefore propose (assuming it does not yet exist) …….

E.164 dial tone , and all call progress tones that are uniquely identifiable be established and integrated into all new VoIP devices. . This will allow all E.164 systems to “remind” the user that they should use E.164 dialing, not UK, not USA, and not Mexico.

Internet peering in Mexico- You got a long way to go baby

2008-01-31T22:53:00.000-08:00

Here it is, I am about to go off on another mindless rant. This time about Internet peering. This is not about VoIP peering, however international Internet peering. Specific case in point, Mexico.

Recently I started evaluating ISPs in Mexico. I have looked at many aspects of Business and residential ISPs, however with a close eye on latency and peering.

What I have discovered should be considered an embarrassment for ANY country. In the case of Mexico There is very little (if any at all) internet peering in Mexico. What this means is that when Juan who uses Telecable (which appears to really uses Bestel) in Guadalajara pings Maria who uses Telmex infinitum, ALL traffic travels ALL THE WAY TO THE USA AND BACK AGAIN! This is a completely ridiculous situation.

Firstly, I do not believe Telmex, nor Bestel are internet Backbone providers in the USA. This means that each of them pays to get their traffic into the USA or from the USA.

Secondly, this represent money leaving Mexico to terminate traffic back to Mexico! Not only that but in the aforementioned case, both Bestel and Telmex are paying for US backbone access for traffic originating and terminating in Mexico!

Thirdly, BOTH of these providers might save a bundle on USA backbone access if they only peered with one to another.

Fourthly, VoIP is beginning to become far more common in Mexico with Major carriers jumping on the bandwagon. However, it is a whole different game in Mexico because of the distance involved to the backbone of the internet and (lack of Mexico) peering. With latency, comes a higher probability of jitter. These issues result in lower call quality for users, making VoIP less attractive, unless of course your broadband provider is your VoIP provider. In some cases, VoIP users may be better off connecting to USA based servers than Mexico based servers if their Mexico based VoIP provider and broadband Provider are not the same company.

I think it is time that countries like Mexico begin improving their own infrastructure in order to improve service to their customers. At the same time they may also keep more money in Mexico instead of paying it in the USA.

COFETEL has an interest in supporting Mexico based VoIP, and they have the power to regulate Internet in Mexico. So let me ask, can they not see the writing on the wall?

Pings From Zapopan
Ping from Telecable Zapopan (Suburb of Guadalajara) to Telmex DSL Guadalajara: Average = 106ms
Ping from Telecable Zapopan to Telmex DSL Zapopan, literally the next door neighbor!: Average = 96ms

Compare those above with a ping from Telecable Zapopan to Dallas TX US Average = 53ms

Next, we compare the pings from Dallas TX to two of the same IPs that we used before
From Dallas TX to Telecable Zapopan: Average = 49ms
From Dallas TX to Telmex Infinitum Guadalajara: Average = 68ms

As you can see from the examples above, the Internet has a long way to go in Mexico. Mexico should immediately instigate better peering, so that neighbors' traffic between them is not routing out of the country first! I suspect this will have to be done by force with a Mandate from COFETEL.

As always, I welcome any reader comments.

2008 the Year we Peer!

2008-01-02T06:00:00.000-08:00

I am calling 2008 , the year we peer for a couple of reasons. I am not referring to the large VoIP providers, I am referring to the small and medium VoIP providers. I also believe that with the peering of the small to medium VoIP providers, the larger ones will follow suit to whatever peering the smaller providers use, as there is strength in numbers. I envision that small to medium providers do not want to pay a high start up cost, nor collocate facilities, which both seem to be the case with the existing peering offerings.

2008 will also be the year that more VoIP providers dry up and blow away. Why? Well the answer goes like this… If you do not peer you will be paying to terminate calls that you may otherwise terminate for free. Your competitors may be doing this already, and those not peering are left at a disadvantage. Also, there is just the standard attrition rate. VoIP is nor easy to make money in , but it can also be a low investment start up, that can support a family on. Of course it does not happen overnight, and it takes a lot of work. So while building that VoIP business you need to save every possible fraction of a penny. Remember the movie, “Office Space”? Those guys pilfered fractions of pennies off of accounts, and it all added up. Now compare that with a small VoIP company. If they could terminate just 2% of calls through peering with millions of minutes annually, that might make it worth a small monthly fee for peering. Not to mention that peering is the kind of thing that as more and more companies begin to do, it becomes more attractive for non–participants to get involved in, as every new peering partner adds their destinations to the pool. Some technologies are destined to fail once a certain saturation level is reached, however I believe the opposite is true with peering.

A small to medium VoIP provider can begin to make this happen now by doing the following.

1) Open their networks to receive anonymous inbound SIP/H.323/IAX traffic.

2) Take advantage of existing ENUM and/or DUNDI offerings.

3) Contact us to offer to peer with us. We are currently expanding our peering relationships and will soon offer all available peering available to us to our peering partners, thereby making it a complete traffic exchange for all peers. Our goal is to make transparent peering a reality, so that any peer is automatically a peer with all other peers on the network, but we are not quite there yet.

Of course appropriate action needs to be taken to ensure that you are only terminating calls that truly terminate on their network. It is safe and easy to allow both anonymous SIP inbounds and DUNDI if one uses Asterisk as a front end for your DIDs. I am sure there are other ways that are not yet imagined as well.

I think in the next year we will begin to see exciting new peering offerings emerge.

Make 2008 the Year we Peer!

Follow Up to this article is here

QOS; Is It Necessary for VoIP to VoIP Peering?

2007-12-19T00:54:00.000-08:00

VoIP companies need peering, whether they know it or admit it. As time goes on those without peering will lose out, as they are paying unnecessary costs that their competition is not paying.

Some have asked me if two providers are peering over public internet, how do the control QOS. I suppose I look at this somewhat differently.

Let us assume that you have two VoIP subscribers that use two different services. For the explanation we will call these two services abc and xyz. Now John@abc makes calls all day long. One of his contacts is Mary@xyz. But since john is the average VoIP user he pays a flat rate to all calls to his home country. Mary lives in Tasmania and has a DID number from John's country. John's calls to Mary are included in his plan so he does not use or perhaps even know about anything like SIPBroker that may allow him to call Mary over SIP directly.

So John's provider ABC works very hard on QOS on their network. Clearly this is an important issue. However nobody can control QOS over the Internet, so that leg of the call is a crap shoot.

Mary's provider has the same worries, and similar practices. They all worry about QOS, and here again Mary's provider XYZ can not control the QOS on the internet to Mary all the way in Tasmania (perhaps from North America) any more than ABC provider.

Now when John calls Mary, there are these two nagging QOS issues on both ends of the call as it routes through the PSTN, but the call works and they call each other every week. ABC and XYZ do not peer. One of the reasons they may cite is that they are "unable to control QOS to that peer" . But WAIT! Nether leg of the call itself when it routes through the PSTN has any QOS, so what is REALLY the issue? Even if the call needed to be CODEC translated, would that still not be better than routing that call through the PSTN? This is without mentioning that the recipients DID may already be routed over the public Internet.

I have done extensive testing on this, and I can say, I would much rather have a direct SIP to SIP call rather than a PSTN call any day. There are already QOS issues all along the path. If Providers ABC and XYZ have enough bandwidth and low latency there is no real issue. The translation to and from the PSTN is far worse than the amount of jitter that is normal on a SIP to SIP call, not to mention Mary's DID is probably delivered over the public internet from the DID originator in the USA to XYZ in Tasmania.

I would like to point out that I am talking about VoIP to VoIP peering where both endpoints are already connected to the public Internet.

Small to medium VoIP providers need to start participating in ENUM offerings. Unfortunately these existing offerings are mostly geared towards telcos and larger providers, with the single exception of e164.org which to date , has not responded to my emails about entering large numbers of DIDs into their database as they offer on their web site. I think most small to medium VoIP providers would be willing to pay a small annual fee for running and maintaining a small ENUM database. Of course there is always the fear of stale data in truly public offerings such as e164.org , so it would be best if the ENUM database was made available only to qualified parties, who control a minimum quantity of DIDs.

e164.org, SIPBroker and Voxalot

2007-12-15T22:31:00.000-08:00

Apparently e164.org http://www.e164.org, SIPBroker http://www.sipbroker.com, and Voxalot http://www.voxalot.com are all related. I must say that what they offer to the community is unlike anything offered anywhere. You can use these services all together or separately.

e164.org allows you to enter your telephone number(s) in an ENUM database. After doing so users that use that ENUM database for look ups can call you free automatically with no fancy codes or dialing strings. The ENUM database simply returns an address such as sip:me@myprovider.com. Your device or server can then connect directly to that address to make the call without ever touching the PSTN.

SIPBroker.com uses the aforementioned e164.org ENUM database as well as others to look for alternate ways to dial a PSTN number, then connects you to that address via the SIPBroker service. This is just one way of taking advantage of calling ENUM enabled numbers. It is really more than an ENUM lookup service though, it actually connects you, and all with nothing more an an ATA. Additionally they offer SIP codes that allow peering into many networks. You can actually use the SIPBroker service with only a Linksys or Sipura device and your existing SIP provider. The services is more like "middleware" which installs between your ATA and your service provider. Best of all , the service is free.

Voxalot.com is kind of like an extension of SIPBroker. You can register multiple VSPs (Voice Service Providers) to a Voxalot account. For instance, if you call the USA , Canada and Mexico, you can have three different service providers. Each provider offering the best rate to one country. You can then build a mini LCR (Least Cost Routing) from those three providers. You then register your ATA or SIP Phone to the Voxalot account where you have installed your VSPs. All SIPBroker Peering codes are also available on the system, as well as ENUM lookups Voxalot now offers limited services for free and also offers some pay services.

I am always anxious to know what the next step these guys will take is. It may be the next logical evolution such as what I call "Brute Force Peering" (More on this later, please do not ask!), or something completely different.

Only time will tell , and say hello to Martin for me when you get over that way!

Non Geographic numbers for Mexico???

2007-12-15T12:21:00.000-08:00

Non Geo numbers do not really exist in Mexico. This is only my dream, as I am often in a sleepy state of consciousness.

I propose that Non Geographic numbers be assigned in Mexico in the following way:

All Non Geographic number should have AUTOMATIC ENUM entries. An entire number range may be assigned to a provider anywhere in the world, and numbers would be assigned 100 at a time to keep them from being exhausted. Each assignment would include the corresponding ENUM ( Let's not revisit http://www.enum.org.mx) entries to reference the providers' SIP Proxy address.
ENUM entries should reference ONLY SIP addresses, thereby eliminating the need to accommodate multiple protocols, and keeping the cost down.
All non geographic numbers should use the code 520 , just as cell phones now use 521. There are already city codes that occupy ALL other possibilities such as 522, 523, 524, etc. This would also make it very easy for the caller to know that they are calling a non geographic number. Domestically however a special code may need to be assigned much like local cell phones are dialed as 044 and long distance cell phones are dialed as 045 from within Mexico. I think the domestic dial plan in Mexico is overly confusing and in need of dire reorganization, however that may only cause more confusion. Perhaps the domestic dial plan should be more conformed to the international dial plan?
All provides should be required to terminate calls to non-geographic numbers at the same cost as a local call! As this cost is currently about $0.14 US Dollars per call this is abnormally high and should well accommodate a ROI for companies such as Telmex who would only need to gateway those calls out to SIP addresses.
The allocation of non-geographic numbers should not preclude the use of geographic numbers for VoIP. Instead, it should only allow an alternative, and a means by which particularly international companies may more easily acquire DID that are more more "friendly" and less cost than toll free, or multiple local DIDs.

I really think that companies like TelMex might whine at the need to accommodate such calls , however Telmex is currently known to be developing VoIP products to compete in the market, so the infrastructure to deliver these calls may already be in place. As for the CLECs , they are for the most part , already using SIP and it is a no-brainer for them. IUt may however force them to open their SIP proxies to allow inbound non-geographic ENUM calls at least.

Dreams of Open SIP Proxies and Public ENUM

2007-12-15T01:59:00.000-08:00

I am so excited about some recent discoveries in relation to Peering! At http://www.SuperNetTel.com we peer with more networks every day!

Here are my hopes about Peering and ENUM from the USA perspective.
FCC should MANDATE that ALL SIP NETWORKS ARE OPEN AND FORCE ALL VOIP PROVIDERS TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC ENUM! This would completely eliminate fees paid to the incumbent telephone providers on VoIP to VoIP calls, as they are the ones reaping the benefits of the settlement fees from DIDs they control. Of course the Vonages of the world do not want that as they are sharing those settlement fees. What the Vonages of the world are doing is a bastardization of SIP. They are not allowing direct inbound SIP calls , nor do they participate in ENUM. Vonage has taken aim at ISPs who block or hinder VoIP, so we as consumers should take aim at the Vonages who are blocking inbound open SIP calls. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

More and more companies are appearing that are Private Peering companies with Private ENUM databases. This only represents a shift in who is making the money and does not benefit the end user. The consumer pays the same if the private peering company is making the money or XO.

Mark

WiFi Telephony in Puerto Vallarta, a first hand experience

2007-12-15T01:48:00.000-08:00

UPDATE
Since this original post , many of the restaurant and Starbucks hot spots are now locked down with Infinitum credentials required which can not be entered on the phone discussed here.

WiFi Telephone, What is it?

A telephone that much resembles, or may be integrated into a cell phone. It connects via 802.11b or 802.11g which are standards used for wireless networking. It uses the same internet telephone technology used by many Internet Telephone Providers. The advantages are clear: It works anywhere there is an open WiFi hotspot, or a hotspot that you have the network key to use.

We recently had the opportunity to test the UTStarcom Model F3000 in Puerto Vallarta. This article will cover the experience with open WiFi HotSpot compatibility, availability and overall call quality.

WiFi in Puerto Vallarta does not have the availability as it does in the USA. In the USA it is very common to find offices and homes opening their WiFi connections. In Mexico it seems that people are less likely to have an open network. Secondly, when available, WiFi does not have the same compatibility for a couple of technical reasons detailed below.

1) Prodigy Infinitum is fine, sometimes, when used with the included wireless router. Some of these 2Wire routers may tend to block SIP telephony packets. Many “Do it yourself” configurations make the error of a separate wireless router on a modem that has an integrated router. Any modem used with a separate router should operate in the Bridge mode, or a modem with a router built in should be used with a wireless access point (with no router), Many wireless routers will operate in a Wireless Access point only mode, but the included documentation is usually not clear on how to do this.

2) Cable is different in Vallarta from the USA or Canada in that the cable providers here do not offer a public IP to the Customer Premise Equipment. Instead a NAT is between the end user and the Internet. This in itself does not present a problem, however when cable companies provide wireless modems they are placing them in Router/NAT mode and not in bridge mode. If the wireless modems operated in bridge mode all of the IPS would come from the cable company’s DHCP server (since they are private IPs anyway they cost them nothing!) , and not the modem, thereby eliminating the second “layer” of NAT (Router integrated into the modem). This current configuration represents mass stupidity (or an intention to block these devices) on the part of the cable companies in Vallarta.

In either of the cases above there are two layers of NAT. This presents a problem for most SIP based services that these phones use. Although at times, you may have no problems with a dual NAT, the problem may occur suddenly unexpectedly, and without warning.

It is also very common to find multiple access points from the same network that are configured in a way that there is no automatic “roaming” between access points. This means that the user must “reconnect” to the new access point manually or wait till the phone finds the signal of the new access point.

We tested all along the Malecon and found near a dozen open hot spots available. We were not able to identify the source of all the signals, but suffice to say that with a phone like this there are plenty of open spots all around Puerto Vallarta that work. In fact we have been surprised at times, like when in the Centro branch of HSBC, that the WFi phone rang on an incoming call. It had picked up an open WiFi signal from the Cigar Shop across the street.

90% of the 30 calls over a 3 day period were fine. Of the 10% with issues, most of these were related to bandwidth availability. You never know what you are getting when you connect to an open Access Point. Also however thee phones can be configured to use different CODECs. The CODEC mandates the amount of bandwidth required. The tradeoff for using less bandwidth , is lower quality.

Vangoh Café, Plaza Caracol: Good Results, but not an “open” WiFi spot they did provide us the key.

Bubba Gump, Malecon; Connectred and made good quality calls

Starbucks Malecon: NO CALLS IN OR OUT WERE POSSIBLE. This is an access point owned and operated by TelMex, which as I understand it they may begin requiring a TelMex account to use. The ownership of the access point alone may indicate why this technology did not work there.

Starbucks Plaza Peninsula: We were able to make and receive calls. We found that the signal from Chili’s gave us better results.

Chili’s Plaza Peninsula Excellent results with incoming and outgoing calls

Vip’s Restaurant: Located in front of Wal Mart offers open WiFi that worked with excellent results for incoming and outgoing calls.

Roberto’s, South Malecon. There appeared to be a signal here but we had problems connecting to it. We later found a different signal with SSID “Home of the Dolphins” just a few doors to the south, but could not find the origin.

In Nuevo Vallarta we found Velas and another called Marival. Neither of these were usable for VoIP Services , most probably due to the configuration of those networks.

We found a lot of WiFi signals in and around Vallarta that have the SSID name “WebStar” We suspect that these come from “Webstar” wireless cable modems. Unfortunately because the configuration of the double NAT described earlier, NONE of them worked!

The nice folks at AeroNet allowed us to test the WiFi phone with their service in their office. We had excellent outbound call quality, but could not test inbound calls.

In conclusion any person making regular stops in Vallarta will learn where the open WiFi Spots are very quickly. This means you can easily stop for a coffee, and make some calls in a more relaxed environment while not paying through the nose. If you are fortunate enough to have the same service in all locations, those calls may well be free, no matter the physical locations.

The cost of these WiFi phones can be anywhere from about $150 US to $400 USD depending on the model and features.

I think there is also an important rule of thumb to follow, “The love you take is equal to the love you make”. What this means if you will be using others’ bandwidth, share yours, and do not be a leech!

The Never Ending Mexico ENUM Tests

2007-12-15T01:36:00.000-08:00

Well, I really have to wonder about who is behind the Mexico ENUM tests at enum.org.mx.

I think it Must Be Telmex and Sr. Carlos Slime (SP? - Really?). These folks have been in testing now for I think over two years, and you can still not put a real phone number in their database! They issue fake seven digit numbers for the ENUM tests. I mean that is great for testing but we want it in production, especially now that more and more SIP service providers come online in Mexico.

For those of you who do not know TelMex owns the local telephone loop and does not make it available to CLECs , or at least not at a reasonable price. This forces CLECs to use alternate methods to deliver local Telephone service. VoIP is rapidly becoming the method of choice. Unfortunately I have not yet found any open SIP proxies from any of them to send calls to, but perhaps that MIGHT change if there were a real Mexico ENUM database. It is the old chicken or the egg....

I mean I could see exactly why Telmex, who probably donates heavily to the Tech de Monterrey would want to hinder ENUM in Mexico.