No doubt some of you will remember back in February Dave Knell posted details of the UKDDI service
he had developed which gives you contiguous blocks of 10 DDIs which you can point at VoIP devices. http://www.ukddi.com/
He just sent an email to account holders informing us that it is now possible to configure one or more
of the DDIs for fax to email
Just route your chosen DDI to fax:email@address
Two things I have noticed that I have posted in the forum, http://forum.ukddi.com/ The email address must not exceed 28 characters
and if you go into the config screen a second time and click ROUTE again the routing changes to "register" and calls will no longer
be answered with fax tones.
In David's own words, this is not time limited, and there is no intention to make it chargeable.
On Oct 15, 8:30*pm, "Graham." <m...@privacy.com> wrote:
> Two things I have noticed that I have posted in the forum,http://forum.ukddi.com/The email address must not exceed 28 characters
> and if you go into the config screen a second time and click ROUTE again the routing changes to "register" and calls will no longer
> be answered with fax tones.
A word of thanks to Graham for spotting these two bugs, both of which
I think I've fixed.
In uk.telecom.voip David Knell <david.knell@gmail.com> wrote:
> A word of thanks to Graham for spotting these two bugs, both of which
> I think I've fixed.
A stupid question... is CLID passed through? According to this: http://forum.ukddi.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5
it suggests the CLID is always Anonymous. Is there any other way to extract
the caller's number?
In article <VSr*VqNlt@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>In uk.telecom.voip David Knell <david.knell@gmail.com> wrote:
>> A word of thanks to Graham for spotting these two bugs, both of which
>> I think I've fixed.
>
>A stupid question... is CLID passed through? According to this:
>http://forum.ukddi.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5
>it suggests the CLID is always Anonymous. Is there any other way to extract
>the caller's number?
Caller ID seems to come through OK, however it's in E.164 format with
a leading plus sign...
>>A stupid question... is CLID passed through? According to this:
>>http://forum.ukddi.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5
>>it suggests the CLID is always Anonymous. Is there any other way to extract
>>the caller's number?
>
> Caller ID seems to come through OK, however it's in E.164 format with
> a leading plus sign...
>
> Gordon
I didn't think you would touch a service with no SLA ;-)
In article <i9cnfs$2l6$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
Graham. <me@privacy.com> wrote:
>
>>>A stupid question... is CLID passed through? According to this:
>>>http://forum.ukddi.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5
>>>it suggests the CLID is always Anonymous. Is there any other way to extract
>>>the caller's number?
>>
>> Caller ID seems to come through OK, however it's in E.164 format with
>> a leading plus sign...
>>
>> Gordon
>
>I didn't think you would touch a service with no SLA ;-)
Playtime vs. worktime... And it only took a moment to go there, register
a number and give it a go...
And it "just worked"...
Wonder how long it will last. Wonder what their plans are, etc.
On 16/10/2010 18:39, Gordon Henderson wrote:
>
> I didn't think you would touch a service with no SLA ;-)
> Playtime vs. worktime... And it only took a moment to go there, register
> a number and give it a go...
>
> And it "just worked"...
>
> Wonder how long it will last. Wonder what their plans are, etc.
>
> Gordon
I registered a number and ATA shows as registered but number is a
non-event.
Dialing it just gives nothing.
Account still registered but not pursued as it was/is a "free" offering
so can't expect free support and it's no loss if it doesn't kick in to
life although it's a great 01275 number if it worked.
:¬)
Pete.
"Graham." <me@privacy.com> wrote in message
news:i9aa3s$90i$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> No doubt some of you will remember back in February Dave Knell posted
> details of the UKDDI service
> he had developed which gives you contiguous blocks of 10 DDIs which you
> can point at VoIP devices.
> http://www.ukddi.com/
> He just sent an email to account holders informing us that it is now
> possible to configure one or more
> of the DDIs for fax to email
> Just route your chosen DDI to fax:email@address
>
>
Fax? Isn't that something granddad used to have
Steve Terry
--
"I would like to plead for my right to investigate natural phenomena
without having guns pointed at me.
I also ask for the right to be wrong without being hanged for it."
- Wilhelm Reich, November 1947
In article <i9deos$bqe$1@news.eternal-september.org>, www.GymRatZ.co.uk <discount-fitness-equipment@gym.shop.com> wrote:
> On 16/10/2010 18:39, Gordon Henderson wrote:
>>
>> I didn't think you would touch a service with no SLA ;-)
>> Playtime vs. worktime... And it only took a moment to go there, register
>> a number and give it a go...
>>
>> And it "just worked"...
>>
>> Wonder how long it will last. Wonder what their plans are, etc.
>>
>> Gordon
>I registered a number and ATA shows as registered but number is a
>non-event.
>Dialing it just gives nothing.
>Account still registered but not pursued as it was/is a "free" offering
>so can't expect free support and it's no loss if it doesn't kick in to
>life although it's a great 01275 number if it worked.
>:¬)
They have 2 ways to get the call to you - they can punt it to a SIP server
which accepts anonnymous incoming calls, or you can register to them
and they send the call that route. I used the former as it was easier...
If you're using the register method, did you set the target as 'register' ?
On Oct 16, 6:39*pm, gor...@lion.drogon.net (Gordon Henderson) wrote:
> In article <i9cnfs$2l.
> Playtime vs. worktime... And it only took a moment to go there, register
> a number and give it a go...
>
> And it "just worked"...
That's how it's supposed to be, although it's always a pleasant
surprise
to have it confirmed.
> Wonder how long it will last. Wonder what their plans are, etc.
We've been offering free DDIs for a couple of years, and have no plans
to
change things, start charging for inbound, etc.
On Oct 17, 1:07*am, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk" <discount-fitness-
equipm...@gym.shop.com> wrote:
Hi Pete -
> I registered a number and ATA shows as registered *but number is *a
> non-event.
> Dialing it just gives nothing.
> Account still registered but not pursued as it was/is a "free" offering
> so can't expect free support and it's no loss if it doesn't kick in to
> life although it's a great 01275 number if it worked.
Drop me an e-mail (support@ukddi.com) with your login and I'll take
a look.
>> No doubt some of you will remember back in February Dave Knell posted details of the UKDDI service
>> he had developed which gives you contiguous blocks of 10 DDIs which you can point at VoIP devices.
>> http://www.ukddi.com/
>> He just sent an email to account holders informing us that it is now possible to configure one or more
>> of the DDIs for fax to email
>> Just route your chosen DDI to fax:email@address
>>
>>
> Fax? Isn't that something granddad used to have
>
You know that and I know that, but do our customers, and the people that have us for customers necessarily
know that yet?
"Graham." <me@privacy.com> wrote in message
news:i9efla$dor$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>>> No doubt some of you will remember back in February Dave Knell posted
>>> details of the UKDDI service
>>> he had developed which gives you contiguous blocks of 10 DDIs which you
>>> can point at VoIP devices.
>>> http://www.ukddi.com/
>>> He just sent an email to account holders informing us that it is now
>>> possible to configure one or more
>>> of the DDIs for fax to email
>>> Just route your chosen DDI to fax:email@address
>>>
>> Fax? Isn't that something granddad used to have
>>
> You know that and I know that, but do our customers, and the people that
> have us for customers necessarily
> know that yet?
No, its a useful device for immediately sending information that you know
will be received at the time of sending. Where to might be questionable in
a large organisation, but debatably more accurately than email (for
instance).
Also a physical record might be important, rather than something that may be
flagged as spam, deleted off the mail server, not backed up, erased by
viruses, trojans etc.
Most businesses (in particular those who need to keep records for five years
or more, accountants, solictors etc) have faxes.
I'm talking about real faxes of course, not fax/modems as internal or
external additions to pcs.
"jasee" <jasee@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:i-WdnYDlg69APyPRnZ2dnUVZ7tWdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "Graham." <me@privacy.com> wrote in message news:i9efla$dor$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>>
>>>> No doubt some of you will remember back in February Dave Knell posted details of the UKDDI service
>>>> he had developed which gives you contiguous blocks of 10 DDIs which you can point at VoIP devices.
>>>> http://www.ukddi.com/
>>>> He just sent an email to account holders informing us that it is now possible to configure one or more
>>>> of the DDIs for fax to email
>>>> Just route your chosen DDI to fax:email@address
>>>>
>>> Fax? Isn't that something granddad used to have
>>>
>> You know that and I know that, but do our customers, and the people that have us for customers necessarily
>> know that yet?
>
> No, its a useful device for immediately sending information that you know will be received at the time of sending. Where to might
> be questionable in a large organisation, but debatably more accurately than email (for instance).
> Also a physical record might be important, rather than something that may be flagged as spam, deleted off the mail server, not
> backed up, erased by viruses, trojans etc.
> Most businesses (in particular those who need to keep records for five years or more, accountants, solictors etc) have faxes.
> I'm talking about real faxes of course, not fax/modems as internal or external additions to pcs.
'Course it's got to print on rolls of scrunchy thermal paper to qualify as a real fax ;-)
Graham. wrote:
> "jasee" <jasee@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:i-WdnYDlg69APyPRnZ2dnUVZ7tWdnZ2d@bt.com...
>>
>> "Graham." <me@privacy.com> wrote in message
>> news:i9efla$dor$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>
>>>
>>>>> No doubt some of you will remember back in February Dave Knell
>>>>> posted details of the UKDDI service he had developed which gives you
>>>>> contiguous blocks of 10 DDIs which you can point at VoIP devices.
>>>>> http://www.ukddi.com/
>>>>> He just sent an email to account holders informing us that it is
>>>>> now possible to configure one or more of the DDIs for fax to email
>>>>> Just route your chosen DDI to fax:email@address
>>>>>
>>>> Fax? Isn't that something granddad used to have
>>>>
>>> You know that and I know that, but do our customers, and the people
>>> that have us for customers necessarily know that yet?
>>
>> No, its a useful device for immediately sending information that you
>> know will be received at the time of sending. Where to might be
>> questionable in a large organisation, but debatably more accurately
>> than email (for instance). Also a physical record might be important,
>> rather than something
>> that may be flagged as spam, deleted off the mail server, not backed
>> up, erased by viruses, trojans etc. Most businesses (in particular those
>> who need to keep records for
>> five years or more, accountants, solictors etc) have faxes. I'm talking
>> about real faxes of course, not fax/modems as internal
>> or external additions to pcs.
>
> 'Course it's got to print on rolls of scrunchy thermal paper to
> qualify as a real fax ;-)
<g>
Well no, it doesn't last long enough if printed that way. Inkjet or Laser.
Carbon film printed presents it's own problems as I've never heard of
companies shredding the waste film (which they should do)
>>> five years or more, accountants, solictors etc) have faxes. I'm talking about real faxes of course, not fax/modems as internal
>>> or external additions to pcs.
>>
>> 'Course it's got to print on rolls of scrunchy thermal paper to
>> qualify as a real fax ;-)
>
> <g>
> Well no, it doesn't last long enough if printed that way. Inkjet or Laser. Carbon film printed presents it's own problems as I've
> never heard of companies shredding the waste film (which they should do)
Carbon film fax machines are the s**** of the devil, thankfully
I haven't come across one for quite some time.
Actually I have seen valiant attempts at destroying the film, but my customers
are NHS contractors so "information governance" should be a priority
Heads-up guys: free geographic fax to email 
Linear Mode
