G.722 test number?

Discussion in 'UK VOIP' started by John Miller, Oct 11, 2007.

  1. John Miller

    John Miller Guest

    Is there a (automated) telephone number available where I can call to test
    the G.722 codec? Or a SIP address?

    Thanks! Because now I have a phone with this wideband codec, but no-one to
    call ...
    John Miller, Oct 11, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John Miller

    Tim Guest

    John Miller wrote:
    > Is there a (automated) telephone number available where I can call to test
    > the G.722 codec? Or a SIP address?
    >


    Telephone number wouldn't be much use because you can only pass G.711
    over the PSTN.

    I have a G.722 phone (well, loads) but I'm not going to publish my sip
    address here.


    Tim
    Tim, Oct 12, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. John Miller

    TheMgt Guest

    Tim wrote:
    > John Miller wrote:
    >> Is there a (automated) telephone number available where I can call to
    >> test the G.722 codec? Or a SIP address?
    >>

    >
    > Telephone number wouldn't be much use because you can only pass G.711
    > over the PSTN.
    >
    > I have a G.722 phone (well, loads) but I'm not going to publish my sip
    > address here.


    Why not? What'll happen?
    TheMgt, Oct 12, 2007
    #3
  4. John Miller

    Iain Guest

    TheMgt wrote:
    ..
    >>
    >> I have a G.722 phone (well, loads) but I'm not going to publish my sip
    >> address here.

    >
    > Why not? What'll happen?


    Spam calls?
    Iain, Oct 12, 2007
    #4
  5. John Miller

    alexd Guest

    Iain wrote:

    > TheMgt wrote:
    > .
    >>>
    >>> I have a G.722 phone (well, loads) but I'm not going to publish my sip
    >>> address here.

    >>
    >> Why not? What'll happen?

    >
    > Spam calls?


    I was going to put my numbers on e164.org but am hesitant for this very
    reason.

    --
    <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    22:26:19 up 12 days, 14 min, 2 users, load average: 0.29, 0.23, 0.17
    09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 88 c0
    alexd, Oct 12, 2007
    #5
  6. John Miller

    TheMgt Guest

    Iain wrote:
    > TheMgt wrote:
    > .
    >>>
    >>> I have a G.722 phone (well, loads) but I'm not going to publish my sip
    >>> address here.

    >>
    >> Why not? What'll happen?

    >
    > Spam calls?


    Great! A chance to abuse spammers directly.
    How would spammers harvest them from usenet anyway? They're
    indistinguishable from email addresses.
    Wouldn't it be easier for a prospective phone spammer just to wardial
    their way through
    number ranges used by VoIP providers or look through ENUM records for
    SIP addresses?
    TheMgt, Oct 12, 2007
    #6
  7. John Miller

    TheMgt Guest

    alexd wrote:
    > Iain wrote:
    >
    >> TheMgt wrote:
    >> .
    >>>> I have a G.722 phone (well, loads) but I'm not going to publish my sip
    >>>> address here.
    >>> Why not? What'll happen?

    >> Spam calls?

    >
    > I was going to put my numbers on e164.org but am hesitant for this very
    > reason.


    Did that last year. No spam yet. Would it even be an attractive prospect
    for spammers? Email spam can be delivered very quickly, phone spam would
    require much more time and bandwidth.
    TheMgt, Oct 12, 2007
    #7
  8. John Miller

    alexd Guest

    TheMgt wrote:

    > alexd wrote:
    >> Iain wrote:
    >>
    >>> TheMgt wrote:
    >>> .
    >>>>> I have a G.722 phone (well, loads) but I'm not going to publish my sip
    >>>>> address here.
    >>>> Why not? What'll happen?
    >>> Spam calls?

    >>
    >> I was going to put my numbers on e164.org but am hesitant for this very
    >> reason.

    >
    > Did that last year. No spam yet. Would it even be an attractive prospect
    > for spammers?


    No idea; I suppose I haven't seen any reports here about VoIP spam so maybe
    I am being a little paranoid. Having said that we've got some SIP trunks on
    the phone system at work and we do get the odd recorded message asking us
    to press 1 if we'd like to save money on phone calls.

    > Email spam can be delivered very quickly, phone spam would
    > require much more time and bandwidth.


    In the US where local calls have been free for many a year, telemarketers
    are much despised and have led to the creation of the national Do Not Call
    list. Hopefully, this intrusive form of spamming won't become pervasive in
    the UK.

    --
    <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    09:00:48 up 12 days, 10:49, 2 users, load average: 0.25, 0.24, 0.21
    09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 88 c0
    alexd, Oct 13, 2007
    #8
  9. John Miller

    Tim Guest

    TheMgt wrote:
    > Why not? What'll happen?


    50+ people might phone me[1] :)

    As an experiment, I've setup sip:

    Phone (Snom370) is setup to prefer G.722.


    Give me a call.

    Unless your phone is on a public IP, you will almost certainly need an
    outbound proxy to help get your audio back down your NAT.



    [1] - I've been using SIP since 2002. I know most phones, systems,
    setups. There are nice people, and then they are those who think I
    exist only as a 24/7 SIP free sip helpline.


    Tim
    Tim, Oct 13, 2007
    #9
  10. John Miller

    Christian Guest

    > Did that last year. No spam yet. Would it even be an attractive prospect
    > for spammers? Email spam can be delivered very quickly, phone spam
    > would require much more time and bandwidth.


    Not sure if a spammer would care, if the software taking care of calling
    SIP-addresses with pre-recorded messages would run on a network of infected
    PC's (botnets), like is currently the case with email-spam. It might be that
    blacklists and greenlists are going to be a necessary feature in future
    SIP-phones or with SIP-providers :-(

    So far I haven't had any SPIT (that's what they call it, I believe) on my
    numbers registered at e164.org either.

    Christian
    Christian, Oct 13, 2007
    #10
  11. John Miller

    stephen Guest

    "alexd" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > TheMgt wrote:
    >
    > > alexd wrote:
    > >> Iain wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> TheMgt wrote:
    > >>> .
    > >>>>> I have a G.722 phone (well, loads) but I'm not going to publish my

    sip
    > >>>>> address here.
    > >>>> Why not? What'll happen?
    > >>> Spam calls?
    > >>
    > >> I was going to put my numbers on e164.org but am hesitant for this very
    > >> reason.

    > >
    > > Did that last year. No spam yet. Would it even be an attractive prospect
    > > for spammers?

    >
    > No idea; I suppose I haven't seen any reports here about VoIP spam so

    maybe
    > I am being a little paranoid. Having said that we've got some SIP trunks

    on
    > the phone system at work and we do get the odd recorded message asking us
    > to press 1 if we'd like to save money on phone calls.
    >
    > > Email spam can be delivered very quickly, phone spam would
    > > require much more time and bandwidth.

    >
    > In the US where local calls have been free for many a year, telemarketers
    > are much despised and have led to the creation of the national Do Not Call
    > list. Hopefully, this intrusive form of spamming won't become pervasive in
    > the UK.


    the telephone preference service has been around for a fair while:
    http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/tps/
    >
    > --
    > <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    > 09:00:48 up 12 days, 10:49, 2 users, load average: 0.25, 0.24, 0.21
    > 09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 88 c0
    >

    --
    Regards

    - replace xyz with ntl
    stephen, Oct 13, 2007
    #11
  12. John Miller

    Ivor Jones Guest

    "Christian" <> wrote in
    message news:4710c5b8$0$226$4all.nl
    : : : Did that last year. No spam yet. Would it even be an
    : : : attractive prospect for spammers? Email spam can be
    : : : delivered very quickly, phone spam would require much
    : : : more time and bandwidth.
    : :
    : : Not sure if a spammer would care, if the software
    : : taking care of calling SIP-addresses with pre-recorded
    : : messages would run on a network of infected PC's
    : : (botnets), like is currently the case with email-spam.
    : : It might be that blacklists and greenlists are going to
    : : be a necessary feature in future SIP-phones or with
    : : SIP-providers :-(
    : :
    : : So far I haven't had any SPIT (that's what they call
    : : it, I believe) on my numbers registered at e164.org
    : : either.
    : :
    : : Christian

    Let's put it this way - it's one of the main reasons Sipgate blocked calls
    incoming from most other providers.


    Ivor
    Ivor Jones, Oct 15, 2007
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. FrisbeeĀ®
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    1,093
  2. Guest

    test test test test test test test

    Guest, Jul 2, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    925
    halfalifer
    Jul 2, 2003
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    530
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    499
  5. David Ruether

    Re: Adams print sells for $722

    David Ruether, Jun 22, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    717
    David Ruether
    Jun 25, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page