All my voipraider.com calls are being charged whilst voipcheap.com
calls are not. I think this maybe because I have a dynamic IP address.
How do I get round this can I use Voxalot or something, how long will
I need the same IP address for, for the calls to be free ?
>All my voipraider.com calls are being charged whilst voipcheap.com
>calls are not. I think this maybe because I have a dynamic IP address.
>How do I get round this can I use Voxalot or something, how long will
>I need the same IP address for, for the calls to be free ?
I use Voxalot for justVoip and it works fine. The possibility of the
IP changing is the reason I am not making any justVoip calls direct
from my ATA.
I put the question, re what happened if the IP changed etc., in a post
recently, and no one appeared to have an answer. You might be the
guinea pig here. I guess that the 7 day thing might have a bearing on
it. You might have to miss out on 1 day or even 7 - who can tell! I
would start by using voxalot and waiting one day before you make any
calls. Make one call on one day and, if you get charged, try again the
following day.
on 14/04/2008, Brian A supposed :
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:03:08 -0700 (PDT), hammond
> <stephen.hammond@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> All my voipraider.com calls are being charged whilst voipcheap.com
>> calls are not. I think this maybe because I have a dynamic IP address.
>> How do I get round this can I use Voxalot or something, how long will
>> I need the same IP address for, for the calls to be free ?
> I use Voxalot for justVoip and it works fine. The possibility of the
> IP changing is the reason I am not making any justVoip calls direct
> from my ATA.
> I put the question, re what happened if the IP changed etc., in a post
> recently, and no one appeared to have an answer. You might be the
> guinea pig here. I guess that the 7 day thing might have a bearing on
> it. You might have to miss out on 1 day or even 7 - who can tell! I
> would start by using voxalot and waiting one day before you make any
> calls. Make one call on one day and, if you get charged, try again the
> following day.
>
Their "per unique IP address" rule is to stop call centres using the
service with a single tenner's credit; not to make dynamic IP
addresses cost more to use......
"hammond" <stephen.hammond@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:59d4d6f3-667a-4e46-bce5-2dbd186211c9@t12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> All my voipraider.com calls are being charged whilst voipcheap.com
> calls are not. I think this maybe because I have a dynamic IP address.
> How do I get round this can I use Voxalot or something, how long will
> I need the same IP address for, for the calls to be free ?
When I use ATA or other brand softphone with Voipraider I got charged;
When I use Voipraider's own softphone, I can make free calls.
"Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cls604ltdqe3j3ilt3egrhtl51uujuu31h@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:03:08 -0700 (PDT), hammond
> <stephen.hammond@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >All my voipraider.com calls are being charged whilst voipcheap.com
> >calls are not. I think this maybe because I have a dynamic IP address.
> >How do I get round this can I use Voxalot or something, how long will
> >I need the same IP address for, for the calls to be free ?
> I use Voxalot for justVoip and it works fine. The possibility of the
> IP changing is the reason I am not making any justVoip calls direct
> from my ATA.
Are you using softphone with Voxalot/Justvoip? Can you make free calls?
If so then one should be able to make free calls using ATA.
> I put the question, re what happened if the IP changed etc., in a post
> recently, and no one appeared to have an answer. You might be the
> guinea pig here. I guess that the 7 day thing might have a bearing on
> it. You might have to miss out on 1 day or even 7 - who can tell! I
> would start by using voxalot and waiting one day before you make any
> calls. Make one call on one day and, if you get charged, try again the
> following day.
>
>
>
> ---
> Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
> ---
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:25:51 +0100, Jono <nothanks@blueyonder.invalid>
wrote:
>on 14/04/2008, Brian A supposed :
>> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:03:08 -0700 (PDT), hammond
>> <stephen.hammond@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All my voipraider.com calls are being charged whilst voipcheap.com
>>> calls are not. I think this maybe because I have a dynamic IP address.
>>> How do I get round this can I use Voxalot or something, how long will
>>> I need the same IP address for, for the calls to be free ?
>> I use Voxalot for justVoip and it works fine. The possibility of the
>> IP changing is the reason I am not making any justVoip calls direct
>> from my ATA.
>> I put the question, re what happened if the IP changed etc., in a post
>> recently, and no one appeared to have an answer. You might be the
>> guinea pig here. I guess that the 7 day thing might have a bearing on
>> it. You might have to miss out on 1 day or even 7 - who can tell! I
>> would start by using voxalot and waiting one day before you make any
>> calls. Make one call on one day and, if you get charged, try again the
>> following day.
>>
>
>Their "per unique IP address" rule is to stop call centres using the
>service with a single tenner's credit; not to make dynamic IP
>addresses cost more to use......
>
I agree that this was introduced to stop fraud but it is a case of
what is the 'fall out' for the ordinary honest user. They actually say
"per unique IP address" on JustVoip. An IP address is 'unique' so I
think they have chosen the wrong word here. I think they mean per
single, static IP address - and therein lies the problem. Just last
week I set up an SPA-3102 for some relations. I did consider setting
up the ATA to make calls directly but I couldn't take the risk with
someone else's set up - thus I chose to use Voxalot because I know
that it will work consistently. As, currently, they only want to make
outgoing calls there was no extra cost involved. The OP is now
experiencing what I feared might happen.
> I agree that this was introduced to stop fraud but it is a case of
> what is the 'fall out' for the ordinary honest user. They actually say
> "per unique IP address" on JustVoip. An IP address is 'unique' so I
> think they have chosen the wrong word here.
> I think they mean per
> single, static IP address -
Why?
I have 3 internet connections through 2 separate accounts 2 of which
have dynamic IP Addresses. Both home connection and work connection use
the same voipcheap account to dial out, thereby using the same minutes
in other words doubling up on the free minutes.
> and therein lies the problem. Just last
> week I set up an SPA-3102 for some relations. I did consider setting
> up the ATA to make calls directly but I couldn't take the risk with
> someone else's set up -
I would have thought using voxalot was _more_ of a risk.
How can setting up an ATA to do what it's made to do be risky?
All you are doing by using voxalot surely is introducing an additional
point of failure into the chain.
>Brian A wrote:
>
>> I agree that this was introduced to stop fraud but it is a case of
>> what is the 'fall out' for the ordinary honest user. They actually say
>> "per unique IP address" on JustVoip. An IP address is 'unique' so I
>> think they have chosen the wrong word here.
>> I think they mean per
>> single, static IP address -
>
>Why?
>I have 3 internet connections through 2 separate accounts 2 of which
>have dynamic IP Addresses. Both home connection and work connection use
>the same voipcheap account to dial out, thereby using the same minutes
>in other words doubling up on the free minutes.
When you say 'doubling up' what do you mean exactly. Presumably you
are still only getting your 300mins/7 days maximum.
Still, it is surprising that you have managed to use 2 dynamic IPs on
the same account.
>
>> and therein lies the problem. Just last
>> week I set up an SPA-3102 for some relations. I did consider setting
>> up the ATA to make calls directly but I couldn't take the risk with
>> someone else's set up -
>
>I would have thought using voxalot was _more_ of a risk.
>How can setting up an ATA to do what it's made to do be risky?
Only because there were people who were using their free call
allowance in a fraudulent way. It is because of this that the IP
condition was introduced.
>
>All you are doing by using voxalot surely is introducing an additional
>point of failure into the chain.
That is very true.
>
>Am I missing something?
Yes, just one thing. There was a problem using Voxalot but there was
collaboration to sort it out. The use of Voxalot with Betamax services
seems to be assured.
>
>Pete
Brian A was thinking very hard :
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:37:17 +0100, "Pet - www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
> <0845-86-86-888@Cheapest-Prices.ever> wrote:
>
>> Brian A wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that this was introduced to stop fraud but it is a case of
>>> what is the 'fall out' for the ordinary honest user. They actually say
>>> "per unique IP address" on JustVoip. An IP address is 'unique' so I
>>> think they have chosen the wrong word here.
>>> I think they mean per
>>> single, static IP address -
>>
>> Why?
>> I have 3 internet connections through 2 separate accounts 2 of which
>> have dynamic IP Addresses. Both home connection and work connection use
>> the same voipcheap account to dial out, thereby using the same minutes
>> in other words doubling up on the free minutes.
> When you say 'doubling up' what do you mean exactly. Presumably you
> are still only getting your 300mins/7 days maximum.
> Still, it is surprising that you have managed to use 2 dynamic IPs on
> the same account.
I use three or four dynamic IP addresses with the same account. Never
been a problem - 300 minutes per unique address, don't forget.
>>
>>> and therein lies the problem. Just last
>>> week I set up an SPA-3102 for some relations. I did consider setting
>>> up the ATA to make calls directly but I couldn't take the risk with
>>> someone else's set up -
>>
>> I would have thought using voxalot was _more_ of a risk.
>> How can setting up an ATA to do what it's made to do be risky?
> Only because there were people who were using their free call
> allowance in a fraudulent way. It is because of this that the IP
> condition was introduced.
Exactly - Voxalot had only one IP address.
>>
>> All you are doing by using voxalot surely is introducing an additional
>> point of failure into the chain. That is very true.
>>
>> Am I missing something?
> Yes, just one thing. There was a problem using Voxalot but there was
> collaboration to sort it out. The use of Voxalot with Betamax services
> seems to be assured.
>> in other words doubling up on the free minutes.
> When you say 'doubling up' what do you mean exactly. Presumably you
> are still only getting your 300mins/7 days maximum.
Well, no, if I ever managed to use more than 300 minutes per 7 days I
could tell you, however home<->work calls are sip<->sip through
voipfone.co.uk so they are free regardless then.
Between home and work calls from two separate ADSL connections we don't
(too my knowledge) ever go past 7 hours a week though there is no way of
telling really as we're using 2 different IP addresses. :¬)
> Still, it is surprising that you have managed to use 2 dynamic IPs on
> the same account.
Static or dynamic makes no odds. You don't actually have to have the ATA
registered to make an outboud call. the call is made through the
internet using your account number and password.
ATA registration is only needed if youhave an incoming voip number so
your ATA can tell your VOIP provider your _current_ registered IP
address whether it is the same as yesterday of has changed in the last
10 minutes (unlikely unless you have re-booted your modem (able or ADSL)
> Only because there were people who were using their free call
> allowance in a fraudulent way. It is because of this that the IP
> condition was introduced.
They wouldn't have been using it in a "fraudulent" way. A more
fraudulent way would be to aquire a fresh IP address once you had hit
your free minute allowance then start a fresh with new IP address.
......but that's not fraudulent as they say it's OK to do.
I guess the rare minority that feel the need to squeeze extra minutes is
so small it's not a financial issue.
>> Am I missing something?
> Yes, just one thing. There was a problem using Voxalot but there was
> collaboration to sort it out. The use of Voxalot with Betamax services
> seems to be assured.
no, I mean, why are you using voxalot in the first place?
From my own usage I can't understand the need for it.
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:56:59 +0100, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
<discount-fitness-equipment@gym.shop.com> wrote:
>Brian A wrote:
>
>>> in other words doubling up on the free minutes.
>> When you say 'doubling up' what do you mean exactly. Presumably you
>> are still only getting your 300mins/7 days maximum.
>
>Well, no, if I ever managed to use more than 300 minutes per 7 days I
>could tell you, however home<->work calls are sip<->sip through
>voipfone.co.uk so they are free regardless then.
>Between home and work calls from two separate ADSL connections we don't
>(too my knowledge) ever go past 7 hours a week though there is no way of
>telling really as we're using 2 different IP addresses. :¬)
>
>> Still, it is surprising that you have managed to use 2 dynamic IPs on
>> the same account.
>
>Static or dynamic makes no odds. You don't actually have to have the ATA
>registered to make an outboud call. the call is made through the
>internet using your account number and password.
>ATA registration is only needed if youhave an incoming voip number so
>your ATA can tell your VOIP provider your _current_ registered IP
>address whether it is the same as yesterday of has changed in the last
>10 minutes (unlikely unless you have re-booted your modem (able or ADSL)
>
>> Only because there were people who were using their free call
>> allowance in a fraudulent way. It is because of this that the IP
>> condition was introduced.
>
>They wouldn't have been using it in a "fraudulent" way. A more
>fraudulent way would be to aquire a fresh IP address once you had hit
>your free minute allowance then start a fresh with new IP address.
>.....but that's not fraudulent as they say it's OK to do.
>I guess the rare minority that feel the need to squeeze extra minutes is
>so small it's not a financial issue.
>
>>> Am I missing something?
>> Yes, just one thing. There was a problem using Voxalot but there was
>> collaboration to sort it out. The use of Voxalot with Betamax services
>> seems to be assured.
>
>no, I mean, why are you using voxalot in the first place?
> From my own usage I can't understand the need for it.
I use it for several reasons, the main ones are:-
1. I can register more than 1 incoming number to ring on one phone.
In fact I only register 1 number, the other number is pointed at
Voxalot. I don't use Betamax for incoming calls.
2. I can divert calls to voicemail on a timed basis.
3. I can send certain unwanted calls to oblivion.
4. I can divert to my mobile, or other phone, if I am going to be away
from home for a while.
5. I can have a common voicemail box for both incoming numbers.
....and, yes, Jono, now I think about it, I agree with you re the point
you made about the one IP from Voxalot being an original culprit in
the 'so called' fraudulent use.
Voipraider.com ip address 
Linear Mode
