[VoIP] Mystery guest

[Steve Barlow]

Could the Mystery Guest be 'News Reader'?

Below is part of a recent thread in the uk.telecom.voip Newsgroup

Steve.


"Ivor Jones" <ivor at despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:5qp7mtF10odrgU1 at mid.individual.net...
>

> "News Reader" <no at email.invalid> wrote in message
> news:a6J1j.1021$8k2.254 at newsfe4-win.ntli.net
> : : Hi,
> : :
> : :
> : : Not sure if any of you have looked at or had any
> : : experience, etc. of the CNET ("The Collectors Net") (a
> : : network of users who have VoIP interconnected old
> : : telecomms equipment - old switches, etc.).
> : :
> : : It is rather fun and cool (lol), etc.
> : :
> : : However, I have only been able to access it via PSTN
> : : dial in gateways... which is a bit pointless and rather
> : : defeats the purpose and makes things unnecessarily long
> : : winded; particularly since the whole network is VoIP
> : : and about IP connectivity!
> : :
> : : Hence, I am hoping some one might be able to advise or
> : : help find the SIP dialling string format for connecting
> : : to network nodes / devices.
> : :
> : : I have tried a number of combinations such as
> : : address at sip.ckts.info ; address at ckts.info ; etc., etc.
> : : to no avail.
> : :
> : : Please please... any help appreciated.



> CNET is effectively a closed network. You have to either be a full part of
> it by hosting your own Asterisk box, or if you know someone on it you can
> set up an ATA as a host off their system.
>
> Be aware that the primary purpose of CNET is to link together heritage
> telephone equipment such as old Strowger exchanges, rather than as an
> alternative to commercial VoIP providers.
>
> www.ckts.info gives all the info you need.
>
> Ivor



Thanks Ivor. I appreciate the purpose and somewhat the nature of CNET.
Particularly, I recognise that is certainly not an alternative to an ITSP
and represents an enthusiasts network of vintage telcoms equipment
collectors and their equipment.

However, as a lay but interested person, I was hoping to dial around some of
the equipment (more so than the manned extensions), as an enthusiast of old
telecoms kit, etc.

It sounds like their is no direct or central SIP server for dialling of
"member directory" entries (offices and extensions, etc.). And inferring
from what you are saying, one has to either become a member, or garner a
registration account off a members gateway.

Interesting... it seems strange they do not support direct inbound directory
access SIP dialling given that they publicly promote themselves, maintain a
directory, are so outwardly friendly, encouraging and supportive of all
interest and participation. I.e. they frequently encourage ( on their
website ) people to call members and the various bits of equipment, etc.
Furthermore, given they openly provide and list PEST gateways... they
clearly don't mind, rather actively encourage, people to call into, across
and on the CNET.... hence my confusion as to why I can't seem to find or am
potentially perplexed as to why they might or would not permit SIP inbound
access (as the whole point of the exercise is VoIP and internet
interconnection - i.e. avoiding the need for PSTN use and potential cost
thereat, etc.)... I.e. if they encourage use generally and provide PSTN
gateways... then why not VoIP inbound dialling?

Anyhoo... shall keep investigating... and best wishes and many thanks for
your input.

Best wishes,

News Reader







----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ian Jolly" <ian at uax.org.uk>
To: "Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches" <voip at ckts.info>
Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2007 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: [VoIP] Mystery guest


> Brian wrote -
>> Jayson,
>>
>> That call has come via Ian Jolly's *server. It won't have been Ian but
>> it could have been from someone he hosts although it is more than likely
>> to have been someone using his gateway +443528111.
>
>
> +44 352 8111 is a 'gateway' back to CNET from CNET.
>
> +44 1 352 83 8111 from the PSTN to CNET and is more likely to be where the
> call came in?   I see quite a few with "unbekannt" in the CLI.
>
> I've now increased the number of digits they need to have in their CLI 
> from
> 6 to 10.  That mystery caller only had 7 digits .
>
> Regrettably even the CLI on my British Telecom PSTN line can no longer be
> relied on to be correct. One CLI  received was "1234567890"  a number 
> which
> doesn't exist. I've also had 03X XXXX XXXX   numbers before they were even
> released for use in the UK.  On CNET not everyone sends a useable CLI. 
> Some
> of us with 'Gateways' introduced the number of digits that were needed to
> get through as we were receiving non-standard CLI's of just three and four
> digits.  As Brian knows, we have even seen the CLI of  "Bedrock 123" and
> "Bedrock 666"  (with names 'Fred Flintstone' and 'Barney Rubble') dialling
> into our switches from a gateway!! :-)
>
> I can't see how Brian is going to send a unique ID from each individual
> telephone - you certainly can't from an Electro-Mechanical exchange
> connected to CNET.
>
> I wonder if that mystery caller was the one that rang  my 'home number'
> phones at 4AM a couple of days ago  - the "Please don't call after 9pm UK
> time" ones ?
> Time to set up a 'timeswitch' on them?
>
> Ian J
> +44 (0)  352      82 26 (via a 1929 GPO Rural Automatic eXchange!) from
> CNET - the Heritage Telephone Network
> +44 (0)1352 83 82 26 (via a 1929 GPO Rural Automatic eXchange!) from 
> Public
> Telephone Network
> FWD Telephone No  83 2230
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "windmill" <windmill at topletter.com>
> To: "Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches" <voip at ckts.info>
> Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2007 5:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Mystery guest
>
>
>> Jayson,
>>
>> That call has come via Ian Jolly's *server. It won't have been Ian but
>> it could have been from someone he hosts although it is more than likely
>> to have been someone using his gateway +443528111.
>>
>> I think that one of the less obvious failings of CNET/Asterisk is that
>> we have no automatic way of knowing the origin of any call except those
>> that we originate ourselves. Not all of us use caller ID and handle it
>> in any meaningful way, I am certainly guilty of that at present as I
>> currently insert a CID value in my dialcnet macro which is the same
>> regardless of where the call originates on my *box or indeed for any
>> call using my gateways +4418073333 and +4428143333, indeed the CID that
>> I use at present for every call is 'Allemagne 493110000'. This is
>> because I have been looking into ways to give a unique CID from every
>> phone on my systems and intend to insert the appropriate CID value for
>> outgoing CNET calls according to various variable settings in my
>> dialplan. Currently anyone using my gateway to test their own incoming
>> CNET should see my CID value.
>>
>> Brian
>>
>>
>>
>> Jayson Smith wrote:
>>> I had a mystery guest visit my system tonight. I'm just curious if 
>>> anyone
>>> knows who this is. I was in bed when my phone rang, so didn't answer. I
>>> got
>>> up to check the voicemail, and the person just hit Pound after the tone.
>>> "cnetIAX","unbekannt","6222020","fromcnet","""anonymous""
>>> <unbekannt>","IAX2/81.174.170.48:4569-3","SIP/sipura1-0815c678","VoiceMail","u6222020","2007-11-23
>>> 19:43:41","2007-11-23 19:44:02","2007-11-23
>>> 19:44:30",49,28,"ANSWERED","DOCUMENTATION"
>>>
>>> Jayson
>