Re: Without SKYPE?
Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri 03 May 2013 at 13:27:14 +0100, Chris Davies wrote:
>> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
>> > However, SIP-ID@sipgate.co.uk works for phones registered with the
>> > network (just like Skype). There is no connection established when the
>> > call is from another network (again, just like Skype).
>>
>> This restriction was put in place by Sipgate to stop VoIP SPAM.
> The reason is immaterial. It effectively cuts that network (and other
> ones who operate the same policy for their own, and possibly commercial
> reasons) from other SIP networks. So much for interworking. So much for
> communication,
Which bit of the internetworking between Sipgate, Gradwell, and other
SIP networks doesn't exist? Which bit of the internetworking is it that
is preventing me from offering you the ability to call me on my phone
if I so choose?
>> Sipgate interoperates with a number of other commercial SIP providers. But
>> since it doesn't use any of the enum services you have to route the
>> call manually. I believe this non-transparent interoperability is a
>> fairly standard situation.
> As long as it is standard, it must be ok.
It's acceptable to me because it costs me so little to call a telephone
number that I don't really care whether it's VoIP or PSTN. Moreoever, I
don't particularly advertise that I'm with Sipgate (outside conversations
like this one); I provide a phone number at which I can be contacted and
it happens to be provided by Sipgate. This week. But why should anyone
particularly care as long as I can be called at that number?
> Industry standard and all
> that, I expect. Skype have the standard policy of only processing calls
> which come through their software. So that is ok too.
I fail to see the similarity. In one situation I must use Skype as a
provider - and pay them for the privilege. In the other, I don't have
to use any third party as a provider. I can develop a SIP client from
the standards documentation and use it to connect to any SIP provider
or end user that will accept me.
>> SIP phones don't (need to) register with Betamax providers - essentially
>> these particular services are outbound only.
> Have I misread the instructions at
> http://www.voipbuster.com/en/sip ?
No, you've misunderstood my use of the term, "to register" in the
context of SIP. If a phone registers with a SIP provider, that SIP
provider can call the phone. To make a call, the phone does not need to
have registered, it simply needs to provider authentication credentials
during the call set-up. VoipBuster (and other Betamax resellers) don't
require or use registration but they do require authentication for
billing purposes.
> Skype came up with a brilliant idea: use the bandwidth of customers for
> phone calls and throw in a few servers for registration, call and
> bandwidth management etc. It works wonderfully well and tens of millions
> avail themselves of it every day. For some reason which I haven't really
> grasped they are often castgated for this.
That's orthogonal to our discussion. The concern that was originally
raised about Skype's business model was that people expected their
bandwidth to be used only when they were making calls.
Chris
Reply to: