|
Home > Archive > Voice Over IP in UK > July 2007 > AoL and Voip? Any problems?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
AoL and Voip? Any problems?
|
|
| Brian A 2007-06-25, 7:11 pm |
| A friend, for various reasons, has chosen to go with AoL for
broadband. Before he takes the plunge I just want to check if anyone
out there is on AoL and uses voip (other than what AoL might supply).
Comments gratefully received re experiences.
---
Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
Sign the petition to get High Definition TV via Freeview.
Get your friends to sign too!
Ofcom want to auction off the spectrum needed for Hi Def.
TV.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/High-Definition/
---
| |
|
| On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:21:22 GMT, Brian A
<no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> mused:
>A friend, for various reasons, has chosen to go with AoL for
>broadband. Before he takes the plunge I just want to check if anyone
>out there is on AoL and uses voip (other than what AoL might supply).
>Comments gratefully received re experiences.
>
>---
>Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
>
>Sign the petition to get High Definition TV via Freeview.
>Get your friends to sign too!
>Ofcom want to auction off the spectrum needed for Hi Def.
>TV.
>http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/High-Definition/
>---
Best bet would be to tell your 'friend' that VoIP doesn't work on AOL.
--
Regards,
Stuart.
| |
| Paul Cupis 2007-06-25, 7:11 pm |
| Lurch wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:21:22 GMT, Brian A
> <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> mused:
>
>
> Best bet would be to tell your 'friend' that VoIP doesn't work on AOL.
Doesn't it?
(honest question)
| |
|
| On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:36:33 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
mused:
>Lurch wrote:
>
>Doesn't it?
> (honest question)
Never tried it, but it would stop them using AOL if they want to also
use VoIP services.
Just a roundabout way of telling them to not use AOL, regardless of
how good some people may say it now is.
--
Regards,
Stuart.
| |
| Brian A 2007-06-26, 7:11 am |
| On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:29:48 +0100, Lurch
<myrealname@sjwelectrical.co.uk> wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:36:33 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
>mused:
>
>
>Never tried it, but it would stop them using AOL if they want to also
>use VoIP services.
>
>Just a roundabout way of telling them to not use AOL, regardless of
>how good some people may say it now is.
My friend can have use of a BT line to carry the broadband but is not
allowed by the renter of the line to do anything that changes the
service offered. That doesn't leave many choices for a limited budget.
AoL are offering a free Netgear router in with the deal - that will
save some outlay, Tiscali only offer a free modem and that is likely
to be a USB - so useless. My friend definitely wants to use voip and
I'll be setting it up - that is why I am enquiring to find out if
there are any impediments to this.
---
Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
Sign the petition to get High Definition TV via Freeview.
Get your friends to sign too!
Ofcom want to auction off the spectrum needed for Hi Def.
TV.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/High-Definition/
---
| |
|
|
"Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uho1831585895j6irr2c8csv116pb4ojav@
4ax.com...
> My friend can have use of a BT line to carry the broadband but is not
> allowed by the renter of the line to do anything that changes the
> service offered. That doesn't leave many choices for a limited budget.
> AoL are offering a free Netgear router in with the deal - that will
> save some outlay, Tiscali only offer a free modem and that is likely
> to be a USB - so useless. My friend definitely wants to use voip and
> I'll be setting it up - that is why I am enquiring to find out if
> there are any impediments to this.
I don't know how limited your friends budget is, but there may be a deal to
suit him here:
http://www.plus.net/residential/bro...x=tab_broadband
There are free activation and free router options available, (dependent on
staying for 12 mths), and contract lengths from 1 month. Overnight usage is
not counted towards usage allowances and most of the plans include a VoIP
account with some "free" (inclusive) minutes.
OK, the PlusTalk VoIP service is not 100% reliable, but the inclusive
minutes come in very handy even though they can only be used to call 01 and
02 landline numbers. Other VoIP usage is not restricted and is prioritised
over the ISPs network.
Overall, VoIP works well for me using PlusNet.
Rob
| |
|
|
"Rob" <nobody@this.place.invalid> wrote in message
news:4680eeb7$0$8721$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net...
> http://www.plus.net/residential/bro...x=tab_broadband
Just in case you can't get to that link above on the PlusNet Portal anytime
soon, here's the probable reason:
[quote]
In addition to this there is a threat that many parts of Sheffield will
lose power today, due to the main substation being located near a
reservoir dam which is feared to burst. There are currently measures in
place to prevent this, however we are unsure as to the success of this
at the moment, as reported by the BBC here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/...ire/6239782.stm
Should the power outage occur this has the potential to severely impact
our Sheffield based services, including portal services, homepages,
email, and our Customer Support Centre.
Connectivity should remain unaffected, as will CCGI and mysql services,
and usenet.
[/quote]
Rob
| |
| Paul Cupis 2007-06-26, 7:11 pm |
| Lurch wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:36:33 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
> mused:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Never tried it, but it would stop them using AOL if they want to also
> use VoIP services.
>
> Just a roundabout way of telling them to not use AOL, regardless of
> how good some people may say it now is.
So you recommendation is to lie to your 'friend' instead of just
explaining to them that you don't recommend AOL as an ISP? Nice.
| |
|
| On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:26:46 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
mused:
>Lurch wrote:
>
>
>So you recommendation is to lie to your 'friend' instead of just
>explaining to them that you don't recommend AOL as an ISP?
From the tone of the OP he already knew how bad AOL were so would have
already explained this, but I could be wrong.
> Nice.
Yeah, I thought so. ;)
--
Regards,
Stuart.
| |
| PlusNet Support Team 2007-06-26, 7:11 pm |
| Rob wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> "Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uho1831585895j6irr2c8csv116pb4ojav@
4ax.com...
>
Hi there,
Our 'free' modem is a single port Ethernet effort, so no USB issues there.
Kind Rgds,
--
|Bob Pullen Broadband Solutions for
|Support Home & Business @
|PlusNet plc. www.plus.net
+------ PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet! ------
| |
| Brian A 2007-06-27, 7:11 am |
| On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:31:12 +0100, Lurch
<myrealname@sjwelectrical.co.uk> wrote:
>On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:26:46 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
>mused:
>
>
>From the tone of the OP he already knew how bad AOL were so would have
>already explained this, but I could be wrong.
>
>
>Yeah, I thought so. ;)
I do not know whether AoL are good or bad, that was the reason for my
post. I have to say, also, that I agree totally with the sentiments
expressed by Paul - that was my reaction too.
Thank you to PlusNet for giving information on the modem. I did look
at Plus Net, in fact I have been a customer myself and, despite all
the problems with hackers etc., I do think that they are a good
company, particularly in regard to the efforts, made recently, to
provide geo numbers for customer service, while VirginMedia have
increased their charges to 10p connection +25p/minute for their
helpline.
However, the limits on downloads on PlusNet make the products less
attractive as does, to a lesser degree, the acquisition by BT.
---
Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
Sign the petition to get High Definition TV via Freeview.
Get your friends to sign too!
Ofcom want to auction off the spectrum needed for Hi Def.
TV.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/High-Definition/
---
| |
|
|
"Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:70c483hovef533d61m52n62mmpjfobcjv1@
4ax.com...
> However, the limits on downloads on PlusNet make the products less
> attractive as does, to a lesser degree, the acquisition by BT.
Depending on how much [obviously :-) ] your friend wants to download, then
it should be quite possible to manage within one of PlusNets download
allowances by utilising the "free" overnight usage available.
Regarding the acquisition by BT, so far nothing untoward has come about on
the customer-affecting front, rather it appears that investment can now be
made without some of the previous restrictions. E.g. longer payback times
are being built in to the investment criteria AIUI, so more willingness to
increase bandwidth capacity etc.
Rob
| |
|
| On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:26:46 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
wrote:
>Lurch wrote:
>
>
>So you recommendation is to lie to your 'friend' instead of just
>explaining to them that you don't recommend AOL as an ISP? Nice.
1) VoIP works perfectly well with AOL. I have a Sipgate number and
have experienced no problems whatsoever in this respect.
2) AOL is not "bad". While their tech support can often be abysmally
incompetent, incomprehensible and a menace to one's mental sanity,
their internet service has been pretty much the same as many other
ISPs (especially since you don't have to use their SW at all). Also,
their "unlimited" service is more unlimited than many others (and it
cannot be otherwise since they are also a content provider).
HIH
Lorenz
[L.]
| |
| Brian A 2007-06-27, 7:11 pm |
| On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:51:35 +0100, "[L.]" <null@null.dev> wrote:
>On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:26:46 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>1) VoIP works perfectly well with AOL. I have a Sipgate number and
>have experienced no problems whatsoever in this respect.
>
>2) AOL is not "bad". While their tech support can often be abysmally
>incompetent, incomprehensible and a menace to one's mental sanity,
>their internet service has been pretty much the same as many other
>ISPs (especially since you don't have to use their SW at all). Also,
>their "unlimited" service is more unlimited than many others (and it
>cannot be otherwise since they are also a content provider).
>
>HIH
>
>Lorenz
>
>[L.]
Thank you for your comments. Yes, as regards admin, I do know that
Tiscali have not been good. I, and others I know, used to use them for
telephone services. The phone service always worked just fine but the
admin was a shambles. Looks like it still is from what you say.
Anyway, I'm pleased that voip works OK and they aren't doing a 'BT'.
---
Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
Sign the petition to get High Definition TV via Freeview.
Get your friends to sign too!
Ofcom want to auction off the spectrum needed for Hi Def.
TV.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/High-Definition/
---
| |
|
| Brian A wrote:
> I do not know whether AoL are good or bad, that was the reason for my
> post.
Oh, they are bad. No question of that.
| |
|
| [L.] wrote:
> 2) AOL is not "bad". While their tech support can often be abysmally
> incompetent, incomprehensible and a menace to one's mental sanity,
Just wait till you try to cancel!
> their internet service has been pretty much the same as many other
> ISPs (especially since you don't have to use their SW at all).
If you ignore all the technical issues like smtp servers, mtu of 1400,
hopeless routing, unreliable DNS and the rest.
> Also,
> their "unlimited" service is more unlimited than many others (and it
> cannot be otherwise since they are also a content provider).
No comment.
| |
|
| On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 23:30:11 +0100, Iain <no-one@hairydog.co.uk>
wrote:
>[L.] wrote:
>
>
>Just wait till you try to cancel!
>
>
>If you ignore all the technical issues like smtp servers, mtu of 1400,
>hopeless routing, unreliable DNS and the rest.
Unless you provide some example, you are spreading FUD.
Are you speaking from recent, first hand experience?
In my specific situation, the 1400 mtu makes an insignificant
difference.
The SMTP servers -- what do you mean? I have no problems whatsoever
with either AOL's SMPT server, nor their IMAP server, nor with the
No-AOL SMPT server I use while connected to AOL.
Routing tends to pass through their servers Stateside, increasing
latency and causing issues with services that look at the geographical
location of the server
No comment on DNS, I rarely get duff connections.
In the dismal British scenario, we are having much of a muchness,
regardless.
As an example, I spoke to some colleagues on the continent yesterday
who told me that their unlimited 12MB line for 30 euro (20 GBP) a
month is not a good deal and they could get 24 for the same money (and
they live in a very small town)
>
>
>No comment.
Lnz
[L.]
| |
|
| [L.] wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 23:30:11 +0100, Iain <no-one@hairydog.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
> Unless you provide some example, you are spreading FUD.
> Are you speaking from recent, first hand experience?
Yes, recent, but experience of clients who we have helped to get away to
a decent provider (or in one or two cases, a cheap provider)
> In my specific situation, the 1400 mtu makes an insignificant
> difference.
I'm sure you think so.
> The SMTP servers -- what do you mean? I have no problems whatsoever
> with either AOL's SMPT server,
Well, I know lots of people who have had problems with it, but I'm not
sure why: the cure was to move them, not to sort it out.
> nor their IMAP server,
Can't see the relevance of that here.
> nor with the
> No-AOL SMPT server I use while connected to AOL.
They don't block access to other servers on port 25? They did two months
ago.
> Routing tends to pass through their servers Stateside, increasing
> latency
....by a factor of five, and it reduces the speed too, by the feel of it
> and causing issues with services that look at the geographical
> location of the server
I'm ot a fan of those in any case.
> No comment on DNS, I rarely get duff connections.
Rarely? If you said "never" I'd be a little less unconvinced.
>
> In the dismal British scenario, we are having much of a muchness,
> regardless.
No, in Britain we pay too much for appalling quality, siuch as AOL provide.
> As an example, I spoke to some colleagues on the continent yesterday
> who told me that their unlimited 12MB line for 30 euro (20 GBP) a
> month is not a good deal and they could get 24 for the same money (and
> they live in a very small town)
No dispute that BT Wholesale are ripping us all off.
| |
|
| On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 22:42:29 +0100, Iain <no-one@hairydog.co.uk>
wrote:
>
>They don't block access to other servers on port 25? They did two months
>ago.
Yes. They still do. Quite good practice. Most ISPs should block port
25 to non-own servers.
But it makes no difference to people who want to legitimately use a
non-AOL SMTP server. Authenticated SMTP should uses port 587.
L.
[L.]
|
|
|
|
|