March 2013 - VoiceOps - lists.voiceops.org

Call Forwarding is broken; or, when CF meets LCR
by nathana＠fsr.com March 18, 2013

March 18, 2013

On Monday, March 18, 2013 12:20 PM, Lee Riemer <mailto:LRiemer at bestline.net> wrote: > Diversion header? I already tried that: > On Saturday, March 16, 2013 1:29 AM, Nathan Anderson <> wrote: > > > 2) When a call forward occurs on the PSTN, RDNIS/RGN (forwarding number) > > is typically included in the SS7 signalling at the final switch. There > > are a couple of SIP header fields that people have conjured up to fill a > > similar role: Diversion (which was described in an IEFT draft and has > > seemingly become a "de facto" standard of sorts, much like > > Remote-Party-ID was before PAI arrived), and History-Info (which actually > > made it into an RFC, 4244). Perhaps, in the event of a forwarded call, > > it would make sense for term providers to use Diversion or History-Info > > to inform them of what to use as ANI. I attempted to send calls out with > > one field or the other included in the header, but it made no difference: > > either PAI (if present) or From (if PAI not present) continued to be used > > as the sole source for both ANI and CNID. -- Nathan Anderson First Step Internet, LLC nathana at fsr.com

1 0

Verizon Business Outage?
by peeip989＠gmail.com March 13, 2013

March 13, 2013

All our gateway connections to VZ dropped about 15 minutes ago. Anyone else seeing this?

4 8

Cisco 79xx Phones Running SIP and DNS SRV
by zak＠simplesignal.com March 12, 2013

March 12, 2013

Hello- Is anyone out there using Cisco 79xx phones with DNS SRV? I am struggling and due to Cisco not supporting the SIP loads now it?s very hard to find info or insight. Let me know if you?re willing to share please J Zak Rupas Tier 3 Voice Engineer IP Phone/Text Msg: +13032428606 Like SimpleSignal on *Facebook* <http://www.facebook.com/SimpleSignal>* !* SimpleSignal Inc.

1 0

Call quality issue / survey
by nathana＠fsr.com March 11, 2013

March 11, 2013

Hey gang, Let's play a game. I have made two audio rips from two RTP captures I made of two phone calls through two different termination carriers to the same phone number (in this case, it happens to be to the IVR at City Hall of Fairbanks, AK). I have temporarily allocated 2 DIDs for the purpose of this game, and depending on which one you call, you will either hear played back to you the recording of the call as it happened through one carrier, or through the other. Whoever wants to participate, please place calls to both numbers (do it either from a landline or a G.711u VoIP session, please), and tell me which version of the recording you prefer, why you prefer it, and if you had to put it into words (which you do), how you would describe the difference between the two recordings. I am not going to tell you which one I prefer nor which carrier terminated which recording (I'm actually not 100% sure yet in the case of one of them), or even which carriers are involved, at least until after I've gotten some feedback from you all first. Basically, I'm trying to find out if I'm crazy, or if there really is a difference between the two recordings in terms of audio quality. I say there is a stark difference. I've had others tell me they can't hear it. Maybe I have "golden ears". :-P Here are the two phone numbers to call: 208-301-5083 208-301-5084 Alternatively, for those of you would like copies of the actual audio files to listen to, I can provide those upon request; just contact me off-list. Thanks, -- Nathan Anderson First Step Internet, LLC nathana at fsr.com

6 13

Call quality issue / survey
by nick＠flhsi.com March 11, 2013

March 11, 2013

This was my experience as well. 5083 is better. Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106 ---------------------------------------- From: "Gabriel Gunderson" <gabe at gundy.org> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 9:29 PM To: "Nathan Anderson" <nathana at fsr.com> Cc: "voiceops at voiceops.org" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Call quality issue / survey On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Nathan Anderson <nathana at fsr.com> wrote: Calls placed from XO eSIP and AT&T cell, exact same results: > 208-301-5083 :00 No ringback :01.5 Music starts :03 Silence and then woman speaking on the IVR. Consistent volume > 208-301-5084 :00 No ringback :07 Loud click :10 Her voice is very weak and fades in (and is somewhat choppy) :12 Normal from that point forward 208-301-5083 is far and away better. Sounds better, starts quicker, no awkward silence. What do I win for playing? Best, Gabe _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

1 0

VoIP traffic survey
by frnkblk＠iname.com March 9, 2013

March 9, 2013

I've been asked to address some of the technical matters of the VoIP at a regulatory-oriented meeting, but not being a consultant my knowledge and experience aren't as broad as they should be. One of the concerns by RLECs related to AT&T (and Verizon's) de-regulation initiative is compensation for origination and termination of traffic. Today many non-pricecap rural carriers are paid by IXCs both for any traffic originated or terminated from the network. Most, if not all, of that compensated traffic, is originated as TDM. The concern is that if the rural carriers move to IP that they won't be paid (hardly) anything for origination or termination. Discussions are being held to use ETS (Ethernet Transport Service) and other NECA-type approach to facilitate a way for RLECs to bill for originating and terminating traffic in an IP-world. These private connections, with QoS support, would allow for both capacity and perhaps volume-type billing. But it's been my experience that much of the VoIP long-distance traffic flows over the Internet, not over private Ethernet circuits. My question to this group, which is very IP heavy and therefore much ahead of the curve in terms of IP-oriented telco operations, is how much traffic flows over public (i.e. Internet) circuits versus private (point-to-point to another carrier or VoIP exchange) circuits, and also how that compares inbound versus outbound. http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/6PRCGWM Any additional commentary on this forum would be help. Regards, Frank

2 4

What does an ALG actually do?
by johnl＠taugh.com March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013

I realize that an ALG is a hack in a router that is supposed to allow SIP packets to go through a NAT router. I also realize that for modern SIP equipment, ALG usually causes more problems than it solves, and that it's described in RFCs 2663, 3424, and others. What I can't find anywhere is what a SIP ALG actually does to the packets. Is that written down anywhere, or is it just network folklore?

8 8

Network Security Audit
by dwhite＠olp.net March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013

I have been asked by management to find options to bring in an external auditing company to evaluate our network and provide appropriate recommendations. We are a small telecommunications company looking for firms with experience in Voice (VoIP) security audits, as well as general security experience appropriate for a Broadband ISP, with an internal corporate network. We're located in the southern US (Oklahoma). Public and private recommendations are welcomed. Thank You, -- Dan White

3 2

VoIP traffic survey
by jra＠baylink.com March 4, 2013

March 4, 2013

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk at iname.com> > My apologies, I'm not following you here -- can you give me an example > of a TDM traffic (i.e. T-1 or DS-3) flowing over the Internet? Didn't say it had to be TDM. I am a VoIP end-user. I pick up my desk phone to make a call, and my PBX routes it. It might go: * To a local PSTN gateway, and out over traditional TDM (or analog) lines, or * To a commercial gateway provider, or * Direct to the other end's PBX as a 'native' VoIP call In either case, it might get there over * Private, dedicated IP networking, or * The Internet. The 6 sextants are "who operates the gateway" multiplied by "who owns the wires I use to get there". Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra at baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274

2 1

AT&T Wireless call routing problem / contact
by nathana＠fsr.com March 4, 2013

March 4, 2013

Hey, Does anyone know anyone / have any contact information for ATT Wireless engineering, or (even better) is there an ATT Wireless engineer who would mind contacting me off-list? We're seeing a problem with call routing to certain NXX, but only when forwarding calls to TNs in that NXX. Thanks, -- Nathan Anderson First Step Internet, LLC nathana at fsr.com

1 0