I am using Skype every now and again but want to get freed from this
and use something different. I could go with a non-specific software
package, but would rather use hardware not tied to my machine(s). I
am thus looking at ATA equipment which will plug into my existing
system, the machine will be given its own IP address, but don't need a
router or anything.
I have looked at software such as Asterisk but it is weigh ott for my
requirements (I only have a few DECT units on the line, and would want
the VOIP stuff to be separate from this).
I will start with just making free calls to other VOIP users, but
would want to allow cheap calls to be made over the line (usually for
a long period), which would mean that the analog line would be free
for incoming calls for example when my sister wishes to make a long
call to her friends.
It is usually my tack to start off small but then start adding stuff
later on, so any ideas?
Thanks.
Andrew.
--
Andrew Hodgson in Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK.
My Email: use <andrew at hodgsonfamily dot org>.
"Andrew Hodgson" <me3@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:hef0d1po3hgv5r73iajp7rgek504a9pcl9@4ax.com...
> Hi,
>
> I am using Skype every now and again but want to get freed from this
> and use something different. I could go with a non-specific software
> package, but would rather use hardware not tied to my machine(s). I
> am thus looking at ATA equipment which will plug into my existing
> system, the machine will be given its own IP address, but don't need a
> router or anything.
>
> I have looked at software such as Asterisk but it is weigh ott for my
> requirements (I only have a few DECT units on the line, and would want
> the VOIP stuff to be separate from this).
>
> I will start with just making free calls to other VOIP users, but
> would want to allow cheap calls to be made over the line (usually for
> a long period), which would mean that the analog line would be free
> for incoming calls for example when my sister wishes to make a long
> call to her friends.
>
> It is usually my tack to start off small but then start adding stuff
> later on, so any ideas?
>
> Thanks.
> Andrew.
If you just want to experiment without committing yourself, get a free
account from Sipgate (www.sipgate.co.uk) and try X-Lite, the software
phone. A lot of people on this group have issues with Sipgate in terms of
reliability, but for testing the waters it is ideal. You may prefer to use
a different provider afterwards, but it's up to you.
Regarding ATA's, it is generally held that the Sipura range are among the
best and most reliable. See www.sipura.com for details of their range.
Ivor
> --
> Andrew Hodgson in Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK.
> My Email: use <andrew at hodgsonfamily dot org>.
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ktq0d1pl1u6fpmbknkvbijjhveq6bnnh75@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:30:35 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>> A lot of people on this group have issues with Sipgate in terms of
>>reliability,
>
> To right we have and with good reason and I am pleased to see that you
> have finally recognized and accepted this fact Ivor .
I accept that people have issues. I do not accept that they are rubbish as
you so often say. They will come good.
Ivor Jones wrote:
> <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ktq0d1pl1u6fpmbknkvbijjhveq6bnnh75@4ax.com...
>
>>On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:30:35 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
>><ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>A lot of people on this group have issues with Sipgate in terms of
>>>reliability,
>>
>>To right we have and with good reason and I am pleased to see that you
>>have finally recognized and accepted this fact Ivor .
>
>
> I accept that people have issues. I do not accept that they are rubbish as
> you so often say. They will come good.
>
> Ivor
>
I'm surprised people are having problems with them, They've been rock
solid here.
Thus spaketh Thomas Rankin:
> Ivor Jones wrote:
>> <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:ktq0d1pl1u6fpmbknkvbijjhveq6bnnh75@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:30:35 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
>>> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> A lot of people on this group have issues with Sipgate in terms of
>>>> reliability,
>>>
>>> To right we have and with good reason and I am pleased to see that
>>> you have finally recognized and accepted this fact Ivor .
>>
>>
>> I accept that people have issues. I do not accept that they are
>> rubbish as you so often say. They will come good.
>>
>> Ivor
>>
> I'm surprised people are having problems with them, They've been rock
> solid here.
I've had one or two problems, nothing major, I would still happily recommend
them.
"Thomas Rankin" <tom@sanguinarius.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:MQ6Ae.6039$184.646@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
> Ivor Jones wrote:
>> <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:ktq0d1pl1u6fpmbknkvbijjhveq6bnnh75@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:30:35 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
>>><ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>A lot of people on this group have issues with Sipgate in terms of
>>>>reliability,
>>>
>>>To right we have and with good reason and I am pleased to see that you
>>>have finally recognized and accepted this fact Ivor .
>>
>>
>> I accept that people have issues. I do not accept that they are rubbish
>> as you so often say. They will come good.
>>
>> Ivor
>>
> I'm surprised people are having problems with them, They've been rock
> solid here
"Thomas Rankin" <tom@sanguinarius.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:MQ6Ae.6039$184.646@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
> Ivor Jones wrote:
> > <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:ktq0d1pl1u6fpmbknkvbijjhveq6bnnh75@4ax.com...
> >
> >>On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:30:35 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> >><ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>A lot of people on this group have issues with Sipgate in terms of
> >>>reliability,
> >>
> >>To right we have and with good reason and I am pleased to see that you
> >>have finally recognized and accepted this fact Ivor .
> >
> >
> > I accept that people have issues. I do not accept that they are rubbish
as
> > you so often say. They will come good.
> >
> > Ivor
> >
> I'm surprised people are having problems with them, They've been rock
> solid here.
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 11:03:01 GMT, "Maverick" <Mav@saysnospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>"Thomas Rankin" <tom@sanguinarius.dyndns.org> wrote in message
>>news:MQ6Ae.6039$184.646@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
>>
>>>
>>>I'm surprised people are having problems with them, They've been rock
>>>solid here.
>>
>>same here!
>>
> So rock solid the voicemail system is STILL speaking in german !!.
Pass, for me asterisk handles the voicemail. I tried it a month or so
ago and it seemed to work.
Besides, isn't their voicemail service still in beta?
You can't complain it's unreliable if it's not a guaranteed part of the
service.
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:q202d151h3k7gp9mrbvv7isk69ib3p48pm@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 07:42:54 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> >I accept that people have issues. I do not accept that they are rubbish
as
> >you so often say. They will come good.
>
> Ivor Sipgate have a lot of "small"problems with their service and they
> just do not seem to be addressing these " small" problems and getting
> them sorted . Has I have said before Sipgate seem to like plunging
> headlong into something new before sorting out the basics going back
> to when I first signed up there was a spate of the service going down
> at weekends but in between fixing this they introduced the useless
> ( has it is at the moment ) voicemail . Even now they still have not
> fixed the problem of the service going down periodically or the one
> way audio and other things so why for gods sake bring on the voicemail
> project before the basic phone service is operating has it should be .
> To sum up Sipgate are trying to get to big to quickly and are not
> prepared to spend money in their attempt to do so and this kind of
> thinking is going to be their downfall . I am beginning to wonder in
> light of their actions ( or lack of ) regarding the UK service if the
> German service was working flawlessly before they had the brainwave
> of infiltrating the UK telecom's market.
I take it English isn't your first language and therefore wonder if you
fully understand how to set up the various options. (Clearly German
isn't your native tongue either else you'd be offering a translation
service)
"Andrew Hodgson" <me3@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:hef0d1po3hgv5r73iajp7rgek504a9pcl9@4ax.com...
> Hi,
>
> I am using Skype every now and again but want to get freed from this
> and use something different. I could go with a non-specific software
> package, but would rather use hardware not tied to my machine(s). I
> am thus looking at ATA equipment which will plug into my existing
> system, the machine will be given its own IP address, but don't need a
> router or anything.
>
> I have looked at software such as Asterisk but it is weigh ott for my
> requirements (I only have a few DECT units on the line, and would want
> the VOIP stuff to be separate from this).
>
> I will start with just making free calls to other VOIP users, but
> would want to allow cheap calls to be made over the line (usually for
> a long period), which would mean that the analog line would be free
> for incoming calls for example when my sister wishes to make a long
> call to her friends.
>
> It is usually my tack to start off small but then start adding stuff
> later on, so any ideas?
>
> Thanks.
> Andrew.
All I can offer is the results of my own experience:
I started with a free voipfone account to which I added some incoming UK
geographic telephone numbers - one in London and one local to my mother in
Derbyshire [this allows her to call me in London for the price of a local
call]. I also added an incoming Spanish number for someone on the Costa del
Sol to call me local call charges but this was from another supplier
[gradwell.net].
I use a Sipura ATA adaptor which has worked flawlessly behind an ipcop.org
firewall and a small 8-port network switch.
Since our low-key start our extended family now has SIP accounts through
Sipura boxes in UK, Turkey, the Phillipines and USA [most through voipfone -
e.g. local London number points to grandparents' VoIP phone in Istanbul!
:-) ] and this is where VoIP really comes into its own - free international
calls between family members who can talk without worrying about the bills.
Non-VoIP-enabled relatives can call long distance for local call rates.
Voipfone sell bundles of 500 minutes or pay as you go for about 1p per
minute to 35 countries including the USA and Spain.
The only technical problems experienced have been specific to the type of
Broadband Modem/Routers in place - a Speedtouch [solved] and a Draytek
[still a problem, awaiting firmware upgrade] and are not related to the VoIP
hardware or supplier.
Voipfone's billing system is a little strange but I gather that earlier
wrinkles are now ironed out.
"Lee" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:3jfhfaFpfe60U1@individual.net...
[snip]
> I started with a free voipfone account to which I added some incoming UK
> geographic telephone numbers - one in London and one local to my mother
> in Derbyshire [this allows her to call me in London for the price of a
> local call]. I also added an incoming Spanish number for someone on the
> Costa del Sol to call me local call charges but this was from another
> supplier [gradwell.net].
Is there a difference in cost between a local and a national call these
days..? Certainly (apart from non-geo numbers like 0870) in my personal
experience the cost of calling any UK number is the same. The only
advantage would be not to have to dial the full number but only the local
portion after the area code.
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:3jfkanFppnrgU1@individual.net...
>
> "Lee" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:3jfhfaFpfe60U1@individual.net...
>
> [snip]
>
>> I started with a free voipfone account to which I added some incoming UK
>> geographic telephone numbers - one in London and one local to my mother
>> in Derbyshire [this allows her to call me in London for the price of a
>> local call]. I also added an incoming Spanish number for someone on the
>> Costa del Sol to call me local call charges but this was from another
>> supplier [gradwell.net].
>
> Is there a difference in cost between a local and a national call these
> days..? Certainly (apart from non-geo numbers like 0870) in my personal
> experience the cost of calling any UK number is the same. The only
> advantage would be not to have to dial the full number but only the local
> portion after the area code.
>
I have no idea - I do not really follow telecoms stuff. When did
local/national stop being different? My mother is on a regular BT landline -
do they not charge differentially?
"Lee" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:3jfkhnFptohrU1@individual.net...
>
> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
> news:3jfkanFppnrgU1@individual.net...
>>
>> "Lee" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:3jfhfaFpfe60U1@individual.net...
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> I started with a free voipfone account to which I added some incoming
>>> UK geographic telephone numbers - one in London and one local to my
>>> mother in Derbyshire [this allows her to call me in London for the
>>> price of a local call]. I also added an incoming Spanish number for
>>> someone on the Costa del Sol to call me local call charges but this
>>> was from another supplier [gradwell.net].
>>
>> Is there a difference in cost between a local and a national call these
>> days..? Certainly (apart from non-geo numbers like 0870) in my personal
>> experience the cost of calling any UK number is the same. The only
>> advantage would be not to have to dial the full number but only the
>> local portion after the area code.
>>
>
> I have no idea - I do not really follow telecoms stuff. When did
> local/national stop being different? My mother is on a regular BT
> landline - do they not charge differentially?
Lee wrote:
> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
> news:3jfkanFppnrgU1@individual.net...
>>Is there a difference in cost between a local and a national call these
>>days..? Certainly (apart from non-geo numbers like 0870) in my personal
>>experience the cost of calling any UK number is the same. The only
>>advantage would be not to have to dial the full number but only the local
>>portion after the area code.
>
> I have no idea - I do not really follow telecoms stuff. When did
> local/national stop being different? My mother is on a regular BT landline -
> do they not charge differentially?
Once upon a time there was Local, Reigonal and National. On 1st October
1999 the National rate call charge was reduced to that of Regional rate,
so BT did away with Reigonal and just has Local and National.
With BT, I believe that this distinction would still exist were it not
for their agressive discount scheme which they apply to geographic
numbers and ranges with rate g21 (such as 056 ranges). Once they apply
their retail customer discount to this numbers, they end up being just
day/eve/weekend calls. Local rate (LCFA/0845) and national rate
(NCFA/0870) number ranges are not subject to this discount and appear on
the bill as Lo-call or NationalCall calls.
BT Wholesale charge based on the type of number and the distance on BTs
network the call had to travel before it is passed onto other operators
networks. An operator with a BT interconnect in London only would pay
more for calls to Scotland than an operator with interconnects in London
and Manchester, say.
"Paul Cupis" <paul@cupis.co.uk> wrote in message
news:daudpe$a33$1@custnews.inweb.co.uk...
> Lee wrote:
>> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:3jfkanFppnrgU1@individual.net...
>>>Is there a difference in cost between a local and a national call these
>>>days..? Certainly (apart from non-geo numbers like 0870) in my personal
>>>experience the cost of calling any UK number is the same. The only
>>>advantage would be not to have to dial the full number but only the local
>>>portion after the area code.
>>
>> I have no idea - I do not really follow telecoms stuff. When did
>> local/national stop being different? My mother is on a regular BT
>> landline -
>> do they not charge differentially?
>
> Once upon a time there was Local, Reigonal and National. On 1st October
> 1999 the National rate call charge was reduced to that of Regional rate,
> so BT did away with Reigonal and just has Local and National.
>
> With BT, I believe that this distinction would still exist were it not
> for their agressive discount scheme which they apply to geographic
> numbers and ranges with rate g21 (such as 056 ranges). Once they apply
> their retail customer discount to this numbers, they end up being just
> day/eve/weekend calls. Local rate (LCFA/0845) and national rate
> (NCFA/0870) number ranges are not subject to this discount and appear on
> the bill as Lo-call or NationalCall calls.
>
> BT Wholesale charge based on the type of number and the distance on BTs
> network the call had to travel before it is passed onto other operators
> networks. An operator with a BT interconnect in London only would pay
> more for calls to Scotland than an operator with interconnects in London
> and Manchester, say.
OK, thanks. I am afraid my eyes glazed over near the end ;-)
So am I to understand while that a regular BT landline still incurs "Local"
or "National" rate call types [for want of a better description] there is
little difference in charges incurred [for regular geographic numbers]?
Interested in VOIP 
Linear Mode
