[Free-RTC] Escape from PRISM!

[Emil Ivov]

I am confused. Are you writing because you are looking for a SIP 
provider, because you'd like to make the point that dumb RTC developers 
should finally just get it and convert to service providers or just 
because you feel like complaining today?

I've tried to give you a few pointers and you seemed happy to dismiss 
them with a perfunctory glance. If this is all the effort you are 
willing to spend then this obviously is not a serious issue for you.

Emil

On 14.06.13, 13:49, MJ Ray wrote:
> Emil Ivov <emcho at jitsi.org> [...stuff about STUN that's probably right...]
>>> but that doesn't really help solve
>>> my problem of having some way to call in/out that doesn't suck like
>>> ippi did last time I looked (more expensive than a fixed line!)
>>
>> I assume you are saying this in comparison with Skype, in which case I
>> don't think what you are saying is accurate.
>
> No, I've never installed Skype, although I've used a friend's client.
> I'm comparing with fixed lines in the UK.  Compared to £10/month+calls
> for that, ippi wants €10+tax/month for a virtual number, plus probably
> €5+tax/month for calls if I understand its confusing pricing as it
> applies to my use.  It'd be cheaper to get a fixed line but then I'd
> have two incompatible phones on my desk with all the problems of that :-/
>
>> Personally, I've been using them happily for a while now but I
>> suppose prices depend on destinations and if the ones you are
>> interested in tend to be more expensive with one provider, then just
>> try another one. Or use several. That's the beauty of it all.
>
> And for those who primarily want to make calls, that's the horror of
> it all.  It's a pain having to test multiple providers for
> compatibility and pricing, maybe giving several of them money and/or
> bank card info with no assurance of decent service or a refund if they
> suck.
>
> Having the choice is good, once you know *something* reasonable will
> work.
>
>> There are numerous other options. OVH, onSIP,  sipgate ... I really
>> think we can fill in a list of about a 100 within a day.
>
> Please do!  That would be fantastic!  There used to be
> voip-info.org/wiki but it seems to be full of ads and spam now,
> doesn't cover XMPP and the other pages have become progressively less
> useful.
>
> Lists from trustworthy experts of what they know works, what should
> work and what has those four features (SIP, TLS, ICE and DDI/POTS -
> maybe XMPP and ENUM columns as encouragement?) would be very welcome!
> That would be a great addition to any (all?) Free RTC websites.
>
> I've really seen nothing like it - for example, lumicall says "Does it
> work with DDI numbers from any VoIP provider?  If the VoIP provider
> supports SIP, TLS and ICE, it should work" but does ANY provider say
> they support those three on their website?  Trying your list:
>
> ippi? Nope. Their javascript-infested FAQ is a mess of things like
> @Q531@ and netiher it nor "SIP parameters" seem to mention TLS or ICE.
>
> OVH.fr? Nope. The fiche technique doesn't mention TLS or ICE, just
> "SIP IP". Searching guides.ovh.com finds nothing relevant.
>
> onSIP? "the OnSIP service supports a broad range of SIP features and
> functionality" but doesn't seem to spell out which ones.  Also looks
> more expensive than fixed lines.  No results in its javascript search
> for TLS.
>
> sipgate?  Not obvious and "Search term "TLS" does not exist."


>
> Generally, if the sites mention specific software, they seem to be
> Windows and/or antiques.
>
> I know this is the fault of those companies and not developers (it
> looks like their marketing departments are mismanaging the websites,
> omitting key info), but it makes it look like there might be no
> support services available for the likes of lumicall and jitsi.  I've
> been using VoIP for years and I can't tell.  Contacting possible
> providers is time-consuming.  It's a very frustrating situation.
>
>> Still, there's a major gotcha with POTS services: if your point was to
>> escape surveillance as this thread suggests, then there is no way any
>> kind of POTS termination could be a solution.
>
> No, it's not a solution, but it is a necessary step towards a solution.
>
> It's extrememly unlikely that everyone will adopt compatible free RTC
> software at once.  It may even be good to flash up a "big brother may
> be listening" warning to remind users of this if the software spots
> them talking with a POTS bridge (numbers starting 00 maybe?), but
> we're still going to have to do it at least occasionally for a while,
> even if only to talk to the public sector.  Skype seem to understand
> that POTS services are a useful selling point and potential revenue
> source for now...  do free RTC developers?

You really believe that this is about someone just not getting it? You 
understand that a developer != service provider, right?


> Hope that explains,
>

-- 
https://jitsi.org