Dlink vp vs Sorenson vp - Page 3

qwerty123 · 08-02-2006, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

I am not wrong but I am also not going to argue with you about this. I have been a network engineer for decades and mulitple VP's on your private network can be accomplished using NAT and there are a few other tricks you could use as well. Instead of insisting I am wrong, perhaps you should ask me how it's done. Then you may learn a few new tricks.

me ask rockdrummer why dont you enlight DHB, Dennis and me with your trick bag how two vp on one router with one public ip?

me has two dlink vp, typical router and braodband conenction

typical router has many to one DMZ expensive router has one to one dmz

08-02-2006, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

me ask rockdrummer why dont you enlight DHB, Dennis and me with your trick bag how two vp on one router with one public ip?

me has two dlink vp, typical router and braodband conenction

typical router has many to one DMZ expensive router has one to one dmz

Wow, you do not have sorenson vp?

deafclimber · 08-02-2006, 02:39 PM

my mom - try this videophone. it is a cheap priced one as i can find in my opinion.

qwerty123 · 08-02-2006, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafclimber

my mom - try this videophone. it is a cheap priced one as i can find in my opinion.

gr8t let tells CSD and Hands Off VRS to buy from microcenter

deafclimber · 08-02-2006, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafclimber

my mom - try this videophone. it is a cheap priced one as i can find in my opinion.

sorry it is off topic... i put that on wrong thread... sowwies...

rockdrummer · 08-02-2006, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

you need Network Basic 100 course

Man there sure are a lot of self proclaimed network experts out here. I was to network basic 101 course almost 20 years ago.

Quote:

if use NAT then you need to DMZ private IP usaully 125

Not true. Natting and DMZ are mutually exclusive. But I am not going to insult you by saying you need a network 101 course. Your comment speaks for itself.

Quote:

videophone use public ip so you can not simply plug two veidophone behind a router with single NAT.

Uhm... yes you can. That is exactly why you would use NAT. Lesson; NAT is used to have multiple devices on a LAN appear as a single IP address to the WAN.

Quote:

sorensnon use database server to tie vp number with public ip address together for incoming call therefore one public ip to one phone number

That's right... all of your VP's would appear as a single public IP because of natting. It really depends on what your requirements and/or objectives are. Why would someone have multiple VP's? Is it so you don't have to run to a specific room to answer the VP or is it because you want to make concurrent calls on multiple VPs'. Here's the thing. Even with a telephone line, if someone is on a phone in the house, another person can't pick up another phone to make a call untill the first person is finsihed. We have multiple phones in our house for convienience. That's what I am thinking folks have multiple VP's in their house for as well. I am positive that multiple VP's would work and I am absolutly 100% without a doubt positive that multiple VP's can share the same public IP address as long as you are taking a single call at a time. Personally I would not use a DMZ for my VP. I would instead open the proper ports on the firewall to keep the VP protected. If using multiple VP's you need a firewall/router that supports NAT and you would have to configure NAT so that all of the VP's share the same PUBLIC IP address. Hell, now that I am thinking about this, you would not even need NAT. All you would have to do is configure all of your VP's to use the public IP address assigned to your CSU. (cable or DSL modem).

You would set up DHCP on the internal LAN to assign unique addresses to the VP's. In that configuration you could use the VP's as room to room intercoms and still be able to make outgoing and recieve incomming calls on any of the VPs. What you wouldn't be able to do is make concurrent calls on multiple VP's but as mentioned earlier, you cant do that on telephones either.

rockdrummer · 08-02-2006, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

me ask rockdrummer why dont you enlight DHB, Dennis and me with your trick bag how two vp on one router with one public ip?

me has two dlink vp, typical router and braodband conenction

typical router has many to one DMZ expensive router has one to one dmz

See if my post above makes sense to you.. One thing that I can tell you is that I am more likely to help you if you don't start by insulting me and telling me I need a 101 course. My skin is pretty thick but I do take offense to insults on my inteligence.

qwerty123 · 08-02-2006, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

all of your VP's would appear as a single public IP because of natting. It really depends on what your requirements and/or objectives are. Why would someone have multiple VP's? Is it so you don't have to run to a specific room to answer the VP or is it because you want to make concurrent calls on multiple VPs'. Here's the thing. Even with a telephone line, if someone is on a phone in the house, another person can't pick up another phone to make a call untill the first person is finsihed. We have multiple phones in our house for convienience. That's what I am thinking folks have multiple VP's in their house for as well. I am positive that multiple VP's would work and I am absolutly 100% without a doubt positive that multiple VP's can share the same public IP address as long as you are taking a single call at a time. Personally I would not use a DMZ for my VP. I would instead open the proper ports on the firewall to keep the VP protected. If using multiple VP's you need a firewall/router that supports NAT and you would have to configure NAT so that all of the VP's share the same PUBLIC IP address. Hell, now that I am thinking about this, you would not even need NAT. All you would have to do is configure all of your VP's to use the public IP address assigned to your CSU. (cable or DSL modem).

You would set up DHCP on the internal LAN to assign unique addresses to the VP's. In that configuration you could use the VP's as room to room intercoms and still be able to make outgoing and recieve incomming calls on any of the VPs. What you wouldn't be able to do is make concurrent calls on multiple VP's but as mentioned earlier, you cant do that on telephones either.

very good you passed Network Basic 100 pat yourself on back two or more vp can not be used at the same time for outgoing calls still one public IP many vp can be use for inhouse call

which port ya wanna open? how to differentiate vp for incoming call?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

open the proper ports on the firewall to keep the VP protected

protect from what?

rockdrummer · 08-02-2006, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

very good you passed Network Basic 100 pat yourself on back two or more vp can not be used at the same time for outgoing calls still one public IP many vp can be use for inhouse call

which port ya wanna open? how to differentiate vp for incoming call?

protect from what?

That's why I said in my earlier post that it depends on what your objectives are. If you want multiple people to make phone calls at the same time then you would need multiple phone lines... Right? Same applies to VP... but if your objective is convienience, then you could configure multiple VP's to have the same public IP but different private IP's, add the private IP's to your DMZ (if you use DMZ) and you would be able to place or recieve calls from any VP in your house.

rockdrummer · 08-02-2006, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

very good you passed Network Basic 100 pat yourself on back two or more vp can not be used at the same time for outgoing calls still one public IP many vp can be use for inhouse call

which port ya wanna open? how to differentiate vp for incoming call?

protect from what?

Dude. First of all you should tone down your condesending attitude. It's not going to help you in life. Secondly do you even know what a DMZ is? If you did then you wouldn't have to ask the question. The answer to your question can be found here in my first post.
http://www.alldeaf.com/computer-isp-programming/31636-need-help-your-vp.html

qwerty123 · 08-02-2006, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

That's why I said in my earlier post that it depends on what your objectives are. If you want multiple people to make phone calls at the same time then you would need multiple phone lines... Right? Same applies to VP... but if your objective is convienience, then you could configure multiple VP's to have the same public IP but different private IP's, add the private IP's to your DMZ (if you use DMZ) and you would be able to place or recieve calls from any VP in your house.

alrwight so i set up 10 vp with different private ip set all of these ip in DMZ with ONE public IP then 10 vp will ring for incoming call?

no no no no not work!

you buy 10 dlink dvc1000 and let me know

rockdrummer · 08-02-2006, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

alrwight so i set up 10 vp with different private ip set all of these ip in DMZ with ONE public IP then 10 vp will ring for incoming call?

no no no no not work!

you buy 10 dlink dvc1000 and let me know

If that doesn't work then perhaps Sorenson had the IP tied to the MAC. In that case you may be able to get around it using MAC cloning. qwerty124... please understand my comments are in theory and there are many ways you could possibly get around this. The problem I have is that I don't own multiple VP's. Why don't you send me a couple to test with and then I can tell you exactly what you need to do.

qwerty123 · 08-02-2006, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

If that doesn't work then perhaps Sorenson had the IP tied to the MAC. In that case you may be able to get around it using MAC cloning. qwerty124... please understand my comments are in theory and there are many ways you could possibly get around this. The problem I have is that I don't own multiple VP's. Why don't you send me a couple to test with and then I can tell you exactly what you need to do.

check out this post

rockdrummer · 08-02-2006, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

check out this post

I did.. check out my reply.. qwerty.. I am not here to get into a pissing contest with you or anyone else. I am meerly offering my assistance and suggestions based on my knowledge and experience. I am in no way professing to be an expert in everything. Nobody is. I have been in this field long enough to know that trail and error are normal when troubleshooting or attempting something new. If Sorenson is like most providers, they provision their devices based on the MAC addresss. That said, there is a way you should be able to set up a seperate segment behind a MAC cloning device and place your VP's on that segment. You would clone the MAC address that was provisioned by the provider. In theory this should work but again, I don't have multiple VP's to test it out with. You wanna send me some? If you like I will email you a copy of the manual. Below is taken from the manual. As I mentioned in my other thread, the below settings are not necessary if you place your VP's in the DMZ.

Port forward the following ports to the Sorenson VP-100. The Sorenson VP-100 needs the following ports open to function properly.

Inbound Ports:
• Port 1720 (TCP & UDP)
• Ports 15328-15333 (TCP & UDP)
Outbound Ports:
• Ports 1024-65535 (TCP & UDP)
• Port 21 (FTP)
• Port 80 (HTTP)
• Port 389 (LDAP)

Y · 08-02-2006, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

you a CSD fan? CSD did no research or development on vp ben soukup still mooch

Are you sure that there is No Research & Development at CSD ?

Ben Soukup still mooch for what ?

qwerty123 · 08-03-2006, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Y

Are you sure that there is No Research & Development at CSD ?

CSD not spent $10 million on r and dm aybe a few cents. Sorenson did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Y

Ben Soukup still mooch for what ?

see this http://www.ridorlive.com/?p=1813

he make too much moola

diehardbiker · 08-03-2006, 06:21 AM

Regular phone isn't problem when it comes to multiple handsets! You could have phone in every room and of course all of them would ring and you'd grab the nearest handset... With VP, it can't be done!

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

That's why I said in my earlier post that it depends on what your objectives are. If you want multiple people to make phone calls at the same time then you would need multiple phone lines... Right? Same applies to VP... but if your objective is convienience, then you could configure multiple VP's to have the same public IP but different private IP's, add the private IP's to your DMZ (if you use DMZ) and you would be able to place or recieve calls from any VP in your house.

Dennis · 08-03-2006, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

CSD not spent $10 million on r and dm aybe a few cents. Sorenson did.

qwerty, your blind loyalty to Sorenson amazes me. You don't know any facts, you just make up quotes and throw them out as long as they show everyone else but Sorenson in a negative light.

Of course, CSD has done much R&D on VRS. They come up with many features that Sorenson turns around and copies, the same as when Sorenson copies HOVRS.

Who came up with VRSMail? Sprint and CSD.
Who was the first to set up incoming calling for VRS? Sprint and CSD.
Who came up with the bandwidth test on their homepage first? HOVRS.
Who came up with VRS through IM first? HOVRS.
Who came up with the .TV extension? Sprint and CSD.
Who came up with the 5 digit extension number for hearing people to call you? Sprint and CSD

I'm probably forgetting a lot more features that the VRS industry adopted because of these leaders, not because of Sorenson. All these features have been adopted or bastardized by Sorenson -- the .TV extension and IM address was never used by them because they simply took over the D-Link LDAP server and said, "Use the phone number" and left all other non-D-Link videophones in the cold.

Now, with this latest "My SprintVRS Line" craze, we may be beginning to see more cracks against Sorenson's so called, "we spent millions developing the VP, we deserve millions back from the FCC and no one else spent as much as we did" statements.

IloveVP · 08-03-2006, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis

qwerty, your blind loyalty to Sorenson amazes me. You don't know any facts, you just make up quotes and throw them out as long as they show everyone else but Sorenson in a negative light.

Of course, CSD has done much R&D on VRS. They come up with many features that Sorenson turns around and copies, the same as when Sorenson copies HOVRS.

Who came up with VRSMail? Sprint and CSD.
Who was the first to set up incoming calling for VRS? Sprint and CSD.
Who came up with the bandwidth test on their homepage first? HOVRS.
Who came up with VRS through IM first? HOVRS.
Who came up with the .TV extension? Sprint and CSD.
Who came up with the 5 digit extension number for hearing people to call you? Sprint and CSD

I'm probably forgetting a lot more features that the VRS industry adopted because of these leaders, not because of Sorenson. All these features have been adopted or bastardized by Sorenson -- the .TV extension and IM address was never used by them because they simply took over the D-Link LDAP server and said, "Use the phone number" and left all other non-D-Link videophones in the cold.

Now, with this latest "My SprintVRS Line" craze, we may be beginning to see more cracks against Sorenson's so called, "we spent millions developing the VP, we deserve millions back from the FCC and no one else spent as much as we did" statements.

Sprint started its first VRS business, not CSDVRS. Sprint just hired CSD for the interpreter arrangements.

I understand that you are very much anti-sorenson person. No question !!!

That is alright, Dennis

Dennis · 08-03-2006, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IloveVP

Sprint started its first VRS business, not CSDVRS. Sprint just hired CSD for the interpreter arrangements.

I understand that you are very much anti-sorenson person. No question !!!

That is alright, Dennis

I'm not anti-Sorenson. I'm anti-ignorance, which qwerty displays on a constant basis with regards to Sorenson. And yes, I know Sprint originally started VRS in Texas in conjunction with Relay Texas and Ed Bosson in 1996 and etc., etc., etc.

Hey, they say ignorance is bliss. I like making ignorant people smarter and UNHAPPY.

qwerty123 · 08-03-2006, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis

I'm not anti-Sorenson. I'm anti-ignorance, which qwerty displays on a constant basis with regards to Sorenson. And yes, I know Sprint originally started VRS in Texas in conjunction with Relay Texas and Ed Bosson in 1996 and etc., etc., etc.

Hey, they say ignorance is bliss. I like making ignorant people smarter and UNHAPPY.

did you know that hovrs filed complaint with FCC last week abt Sorenson nag screen on soresnon vp when call other vrs provider? that is crybaby tactic simply checkmark and get over with

so u ignorance?

Ed Bosson is the father of VRS

rockdrummer · 08-03-2006, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

did you know that hovrs filed complaint with FCC last week abt Sorenson nag screen on soresnon vp when call other vrs provider? that is crybaby tactic simply checkmark and get over with so u ignorance?
Ed Bosson is the father of VRS

Does it really matter who came up with what first? Isn't the important thing here that the features are available to the various vendors of videophones. My guess is that they intentionally share (not steal) the features in order to benefit the deaf community. Isn't that what is really important?

qwerty123 · 08-03-2006, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis

I'm not anti-Sorenson. I'm anti-ignorance, which qwerty displays on a constant basis with regards to Sorenson. And yes, I know Sprint originally started VRS in Texas in conjunction with Relay Texas and Ed Bosson in 1996 and etc., etc., etc.

Hey, they say ignorance is bliss. I like making ignorant people smarter and UNHAPPY.

correction 1995, not 1996 see this

08-03-2006, 02:26 PM

Published in SWCDHH What's Up?! newsletter
May-June 2005 issue
By Frank Mounts

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

Who is the Real Father of VRS? The question popped in my head for quite a while. I decided to set out and do a bit of poking around and researching. I asked all major VRS providers: Sprint, CSD, Sorenson and HOVRS.

They were quick to point to Ed Bosson, the Texas relay administrator. Ed envisioned deaf people communicating with each other with videophones more than 10 years ago. At the time, Ed saw how Internet evolved into people’s lives. He knew it would eventually make its way into the lives of the deaf people. He also knew the possibilities that video conferencing technology was ripe enough to enable communication over high speed land line with use of ASL.

Ed then contacted Mark Seeger who was then the account manager of Sprint TRS in Texas at the time and explained about the possibilities. Mark contacted the Sprint technicians to see if Ed’s vision would work. The technicians reported that it would work. Ed was thrilled to know that and went to Texas PUC with the idea. However, it took Ed a long time to be able to convince PUC and got some help from a lawyer in interpreting. One by one, Ed’s supervisor then the Commissioners were convinced it was a feature of TRS. They allowed Ed to do the trials. Sprint was the first TRS to provide two trial testing.

The first trial was in Austin, Texas during 1995 and was limited to 4 locations. The second trial was done in 1997 expanding to 10 different cities in Texas. During that time, two different services participated in the trials, Sprint and Hanwave Interpreting. During that time it was called VRI (Video Relay Interpreting) but not the same as Video Remote Interpreting. It was suggested by Linda Nelson, a deaf representative that the acronym word be changed to VRS (Video Relay Service) and Ed went with that. Ed thought and agreed it would be better described that way than “Video Relay Interpreting”.

Jon Hodson from Sorenson worked with Ed Bosson during early stages and provided Sorenson PCI, video conferencing software during the VRS trial in Texas.

To some extent, the trials went well that time so sometime during 2000, VRS became formal in Texas. Since that time, Texas was paying for the VRS service until FCC started reimbursing VRS providers, Texas stopped paying for it. Hanwave Interpreting Service was bought out by CSD (Communication Service for the Deaf) so Sprint subcontracted with them jumping aboard the beginning of the VRS industry.

Getting the facts straight:

*Sorenson is the inventor of the high compression chip and co-developed the D-Link videophone.
*Washington state and Texas were the first states to try out VRS statewide in 1998 on trial basis.
*Sweden was the first country to implement a public VRS fully subsidized by the government.
*USA was the second country to provide public and personal VRS.
*Sprint/CSD were the first to provide VRS trials and introduced the first VRS model at Deaf Way II in 2002.

On basis of Ed Bosson’s work in VRS, national awards were given to him by Smithsonian Computerworld and TDI. Ed Bosson has been in communication with CSD/Sprint, Sorenson, and Sweden on making this happen. Hence, VRS was born in Texas. The VRS trials in Texas was then used as a model by FCC making this a national reality. Based on my research and information given, I believe Ed Bosson is the Father of VRS.

Hats off to Ed for making this happen!

Y · 08-03-2006, 02:58 PM

Interesting I saw and met Ed Bosson before at
one of these deaf conferences a few years ago !!
I did NOT realize that he's the VRS Father ... Congrats!

Cool !

And... That Mark Seeger was at my sister's wedding in California :-)
And also met/chat with Jon Hodson and also Linda Nelson at other events

A Bit off the topic: My former bosses happened to be
a Father of the Internet (with ARPA/Darpa)

Remember that if it was NOT for the Internet,
none of these things could have occurred at all.

08-03-2006, 02:58 PM	#85 (permalink)
Y Registered User Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 3,113	Interesting I saw and met Ed Bosson before at one of these deaf conferences a few years ago !! I did NOT realize that he's the VRS Father ... Congrats! Cool ! And... That Mark Seeger was at my sister's wedding in California :-) And also met/chat with Jon Hodson and also Linda Nelson at other events A Bit off the topic: My former bosses happened to be a Father of the Internet (with ARPA/Darpa) Remember that if it was NOT for the Internet, none of these things could have occurred at all. __________________

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

08-02-2006, 02:39 PM	#63 (permalink)
deafclimber :: is a dirt dirty ? :: Join Date: May 2003 Location: hotlanta Posts: 3,564	my mom - try this videophone. it is a cheap priced one as i can find in my opinion.