[78015] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Vonage complains about VoIP-blocking
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Hannigan, Martin)
Wed Feb 16 01:36:07 2005
From: "Hannigan, Martin" <hannigan@verisign.com>
To: "'John Levine'" <johnl@iecc.com>, nanog@nanog.org
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 01:35:36 -0500
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of
> John Levine
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 9:02 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Vonage complains about VoIP-blocking
>
>
>
> >http://advancedippipeline.com/60400413
> >
> >The FCC is investigating -- it's not even clear if it's
> illegal to do
> >that.
>
> For what it's worth, my ISP is owned by my rural ILEC, and I just
> cancelled my Vonage service because it had become unusable.
>
> However, the problem was not TFTP, it was rotten inbound voice
> quality, combined with a complete inability to contact anyone at
> Vonage by e-mail or phone to do anything about it. My link is a T1,
> and it has plenty of spare inbound capacity. Traceroutes suggest that
> Vonage is suffering from packet loss problems at gateways between
> their NSP and mine, or perhaps the packet loss within my NSP (Sprint)
> was too much for it.
>
> I switched to Lingo which works fine. Its box uses NTP to set the
> time, then http to configure.
Odd regarding the Vonage connection. Their sitting on UU from where I
can see and I have excellent transit to them from Comcast.
I've tested Vonage, only because I had it, with the Semena NE2000 Network
Test Device and introduced multiple error, path, and latency issues and it
stood up very well. At one point, I jacked up the latency to 4000ms and I
was
still able to place, communicate, and drop calls effectively. I was
very surprised at how it handled that large introduced latency.
I don't know about Vonage support. Never tried it.
-M<
