VoIP

I'm looking into voice communication over the internet and am a wee
bit puzzled about terminology.

What is the difference between using MSM or software using SIP
protocol.

Regarding the SIP protocol; is this something most ISPs offer or is it
a minority at the moment.

Geoff Lane

"Geoff Lane" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I'm looking into voice communication over the internet and am a wee
> bit puzzled about terminology.
>
> What is the difference between using MSM or software using SIP
> protocol.
>
> Regarding the SIP protocol; is this something most ISPs offer or is it
> a minority at the moment.
>
> Geoff Lane
>
>
>

You might like to read this, it has some info on VoIP and SIP in the UK,
mainly on BT, but seen as how most of the major ISPs here are using BT to
host their service it would presumeably be true with most... unless they
explicity ask for VoIP to be enabled for users on their service (which will
probably incur a cost)

http://www.toyz.org/mrblog/archives/00000173.html

there appears to be someone offering a solution if you use a BT voyager
router, however i wouldn't hold my breath, why would BT let people us VoIP
without charging, it makes no sense, BT aren't stupid.

check it out though if your interested in the subject, I'm sure it will help
you out

http://www.toyz.org/mrblog/archives/00000173.html

On Sun, 22 May 2005 00:07:02 +0000 (UTC), "Christo"
<lessthanchris666no (E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> I'm looking into voice communication over the internet and am a wee
>> bit puzzled about terminology.
>>
>> What is the difference between using MSM or software using SIP
>> protocol.

>You might like to read this, it has some info on VoIP and SIP in the UK,
>mainly on BT,

>http://www.toyz.org/mrblog/archives/00000173.html
>
>there appears to be someone offering a solution if you use a BT voyager
>router, however i wouldn't hold my breath, why would BT let people us VoIP
>without charging, it makes no sense, BT aren't stupid.

This is what is puzzling me - about two years or more ago I set up a
connection with a friend, each of us had a USB webcam.

We were able to speak and view each other; not very good as we were
both on dialup so the novelty soon wore off and we did not persist
with it.

So how does VoIP differ to connections made using MSN or similar?

Geoff Lane

On Sun, 22 May 2005 16:31:57 +0100, Geoff Lane
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>So how does VoIP differ to connections made using MSN or similar?

the protocols used are different, H.323 is/was used for video
conferencing, SIP is the preferred VoIP protocol. May mean better
quality, lower bandwidth, more reliability.

It is in essence the same thing from the users perspective.

http://myhome.hanafos.com/~soonjp/vchx.html

Phil
--
spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
Come on down !

"Phil Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 22 May 2005 16:31:57 +0100, Geoff Lane
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>So how does VoIP differ to connections made using MSN or similar?
>
> the protocols used are different, H.323 is/was used for video
> conferencing, SIP is the preferred VoIP protocol. May mean better
> quality, lower bandwidth, more reliability.
>
> It is in essence the same thing from the users perspective.
>
> http://myhome.hanafos.com/~soonjp/vchx.html
>
> Phil
> --
> spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
> Come on down !

I would have said there was no difference, perhaps SIP is more streamlined
for the specific task of VoIP, however i cant see how VoIP can be so great,
what about dynamic IP address assignment? no doubt people will need to know
anothers IP address if they are to call someone, and since ISP's today
really just assign any old IP each time you log on doesnt this make VoIP, a
little bit of a hassle? I know i wouldnt like to have my telephone number
changing every few days.

Am i right in assuming this or am i wrong? it doesnt make much sense, unless
everyone who wanted to access the web for anything including VoIP would need
to have a static IP address, haha kind of gives a view of the future of the
net

everyone with a PC has a IP addresss, and eventually the IP address replaces
the telephone number system, somehow dont think there ar eenough IP
addresses to support that great a network, thats basically what it is
though, a network, I would say that the same end as VoIP can be acheived
through msn just as easilly, might save you the hassle of getting the SIP
protocol to work on BT and it will no doubt be cheaper... bandwidth caps
might be exceeded however, and incoming telephone calls wont go to your
computer....


just imagine that though, hacving to memorize an IP address instead of a
telephone number

On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:37:52 +0000 (UTC), "Christo"
<lessthanchris666no (E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>just imagine that though, hacving to memorize an IP address instead of a
>telephone number

11 digit telephone number, could be same length as IP address.

The point of things like SIP is you get a SIP address like an email
address and the server resolves that to your current IP address.

Phil
--
spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
Come on down !

"Phil Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:37:52 +0000 (UTC), "Christo"
> <lessthanchris666no (E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>just imagine that though, hacving to memorize an IP address instead of a
>>telephone number
>
> 11 digit telephone number, could be same length as IP address.
>
> The point of things like SIP is you get a SIP address like an email
> address and the server resolves that to your current IP address.
>
> Phil
> --
> spamcop.net address commissioned 18/06/04
> Come on down !

i see like DNS kind of

On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:37:52 +0000 (UTC), "Christo"
<lessthanchris666no (E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>I would have said there was no difference, perhaps SIP is more streamlined
>for the specific task of VoIP, however i cant see how VoIP can be so great,
>what about dynamic IP address assignment?

Not a major problem if you register with (free) http://www.dyndns.com/
who give you a semi permanent address to use with a dynamic IP
address.

Geoff Lane

On 23 May 2005 12:37 UTC, "Christo" wrote:

>I would have said there was no difference, perhaps SIP is more streamlined
>for the specific task of VoIP, however i cant see how VoIP can be so great,
>what about dynamic IP address assignment?

If you were able only to speak with people on the internet, then there
would be no advantage, but if you check the VoIP facilities, you would
find that calls can be made to and from the regular phone network too,
something which isn't likely to happen with some IM system (but admit,
adding a webcam might give the internet connection a plus).

Some of the services allow cheaper, or even free calls to be made to a
landline, and some offer a free geographic number which will ring on a
PC, or dedicated hardware, or go to voicemail (and be sent as e-mail).

>eventually the IP address replaces the telephone number system, somehow
>dont think there are enough IP addresses to support that great a network

Don't forget that we're mostly using x.x.x.x format addresses but with
IPv6 the number of addresses expands a lot ( x.x.x.x.x.x !!) Peter M.


--
Plus.Net <http://tinyurl.com/5jpa4>
I recommend them and save some cash.

With a guarantee allowing new users to migrate if they're unhappy!

On 23 May 2005 19:17, Geoff Lane wrote:

>if you register with (free) http://www.dyndns.com/ who give you a semi
>permanent address to use with a dynamic IP address.

Since your application/hardware makes a connection to the VoIP servers to
indicate you are online, your IP at the time can be reported or logged,
so whether it is dynamic / static should become less important. PGM