Blocked primary line SIP peering - what about softphone ?

Posts: 20 · Vonage Forum Associate Joined: Jun 24, 2005 Posts: 20

So ... does Vonage also block softphone calls from other providers using SIP URL's?

Quote:

OK, now I'm curious. How do I call a Vonage subscriber?

I just called Vonage tech support .

I verified the following:

You can ONLY call a Vonage subscriber by using their PSTN number, you can't call into Vonage using a SIP code or SIP URL. Period, end of story.

Tech support doesn't even know if you can call out using a Vonage softphone and SIP code or SIP URL.

You can use BYOD with a softphone account, BUT you MUST already have a Vonage locked router account.

gnexus wrote:

[phone #]@sip.vonage.net (or maybe it's sphone.vopr.vonage.net ???)

Thanks - sip.vonage.net doesn't work but sphone.vopr.vonage.net does. That's what I was looking for - unfortunately I don't know anybody with Vonage service so I didn't test further.

Thanks for trying that Dennis

I tried to reach my standard Vonage account that way using 4 different SIP providers. It didn't work.

I suppose it works for Vonage softphone only, and I'm not willing to pay extra to set that up.

Does the Vonage SIP code (2431) work that way?

Can anybody else verify that it works either way?

Posts: 318 · Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 10:04 am Post subject:

Vonage is a Broadband Telephone Company, not a Voip provider. At least, this is how they are marketing and positioning themselves. Vonage is to replace PSTN service. Since you typically cannot connect to the PSTN network with SIP URLs (i assume) you cannot do this with Vonage.

It could be a useful feature, but no, Vonage doesn't support it. I think they see some potential for fraud there or something...

Posts: 20 · Vonage Forum Associate Joined: Jun 24, 2005 Posts: 20

That is my point exactly, and why I'm thinking of cancelling my account now that I'm a bit more informed about how things work.

You shouldn't support this type of provider, which blocks and locks its service, if it's going to replace PSTN.

Quote:

Since you typically cannot connect to the PSTN network with SIP URLs (i assume) you cannot do this with Vonage.

You assume wrong on that one. You can easily connect to either the PSTN or to another SIP number using SIP URLs and most other Voip providers other than Vonage. You can also do the same thing using only numbers (SIP codes) on a dialpad type Voip phone. From my understanding Vonage used to support this but doesn't now.

The question still is:
Does Vonage still support it on softphone?

Posts: 318 · Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 10:53 am Post subject:

gnexus wrote:

You assume wrong on that one. You can easily connect to either the PSTN or to another SIP number using SIP URLs and most other Voip providers other than Vonage. You can also do the same thing using only numbers (SIP codes) on a dialpad type Voip phone. From my understanding Vonage used to support this but doesn't now.

Then why not treat Vonage phone numbers as PSTN numbers?

Posts: 20 · Vonage Forum Associate Joined: Jun 24, 2005 Posts: 20

Quote:

Then why not treat Vonage phone numbers as PSTN numbers?

Vonage PSTN numbers can't be called on the Voip network then...

They have to be routed off Voip onto PSTN and then back on again. That's just stupid,and inefficient, and supports old guard PSTN co's.

That defeats the entire purpose of what Voip was created for.
It makes early adopters of Voip, other Voip providers, people using Voip SIP standards and Voip phones, and international callers cringe. Evil or Very Mad

If it works like that then the only beneficiary to using Voip is for Vonage's profit motive, and not for their customers benefit or the benefit of the Net in general. If I was their ISP I would jack their data transport rates up toskim off a bit of the ridiculous profit they're making on Voip. Vonage is paying next to nothing for SIP transport across other's network and the only real benefit to the customers then is PSTN termination.

But still, the original question remains. . .

Posts: 318 · Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:52 pm Post subject:

gnexus wrote:

If it works like that then the only beneficiary to using Voip is for Vonage's profit motive, and not for their customers benefit or the benefit of the Net in general. If I was their ISP I would jack their data transport rates up toskim off a bit of the ridiculous profit they're making on Voip. Vonage is paying next to nothing for SIP transport across other's network and the only real benefit to the customers then is PSTN termination.. . .

I know it's not answering your question, I don't really know the answer, but I wanted to point out that I receive many benefits of using Vonage. I pay a fraction of what I was paying previously for phone service, and, contrary to what seems to be the popular opinion around here, Vonage's customer service has been far superior to Sprint's, my prior POTS company. Vonage's call quality, for me, has been superb and I love the way it has integrated so nicely into my home, it's totally invisible. Visitors don't know they're making a call over the Internet unless I tell them. They're often surprised and impressed. And the reliability I've experienced with Vonage has been near 90%, most of the downtime is caused by my cable company.

Voip networks being open makes sense, but I can also see some possible potential for fraud. Fraud that could perhaps be prevented, but I think the majority of Vonage's customers don't need this feature. My guess is SoftPhone isn't open to SIP URL requests, but, like I said, I don't know for sure.

If nothing else, my comments ensure your post stays near the top of the forum Smile

Posts: 20 · Vonage Forum Associate Joined: Jun 24, 2005 Posts: 20

Quote:

Vonage's customer service has been far superior to Sprint's, my prior POTS company. Vonage's call quality, for me, has been superb and I love the way it has integrated so nicely into my home, it's totally invisible.

Yeah, thanks!

I agree with you 100% on the above. Vonage beats out Qwest, ATT and SBC also. There's really no comparison. And you really don't want to talk about MCI, who sometimes uses really unscrupulous business practices such as slamming unwitting customers.

The problem I see with Vonage is that they're currently starting to go down the path toward the types of anticompetive and/or deceptive policies the above PSTN providers have or once had.

ATT at one time was the only US phone co. They did not allow other equipment on their network until the FCC ruled otherwise. This is basically what Vonage is doing now.

By selling a locked router which only works on their network they are decieving people since it isn't clearly labeled as such in the stores. Of course I had mine just shipped to me free of charge. But many people buy them only to find out later that it's locked to Vonage. How many PSTN phones for sale only work with ATT now.? None!
Per FCC ruling, mind you. Otherwise it would still be that way.

I don't have anything against preventing customers from tampering with equipment to prevent failures and support calls. But if the device should then be leased and not sold. At the least it should be clearly labeled as such. Customers wishing to use their own equipment should be allowed to do this and not have to pay for a separate softphone account. Even cell companies allow that, and that's where the issue of security and network stability is even more important.

Blocking SIP traffic over a Voip network is an anticompetitive business practice, since it negatively impacts other providers with less financial resources than Vonage.

Some of those providers have better service and support than Vonage and lower rates. Unfortunately those providers don't have the marketing budget Vonage has.