Dlink vp vs Sorenson vp - Page 4

IloveVP · 08-04-2006, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Really? Where would I find information on that? If this is the case, then Sorenson should update their documentation. How long have is it been since they replaced LDAP with CORE? Thanks for your help.

Wondering if you are Sorenson installer. It seems that you know so much about Sorenson but not this LDAP-Core stuff.

Dennis · 08-04-2006, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IloveVP

Wondering if you are Sorenson installer. It seems that you know so much about Sorenson but not this LDAP-Core stuff.

You need to stop accusing people of working for Sorenson because they're so smart about VRS. Attempting to discredit others by labelling them is a poor way to argue, Sorenson Fanboi.

I understand that blocking port 389 still allows updating of the VP and still receive the list. That would be the only evidence that Sorenson has possibly changed from LDAP to something else. It's also entirely possible that you can access LDAP services from a different port, such as port 80. That's not a big deal, and if you control both ends of the system, you control the transmission. There's lots of tunneling methods that are available out there for transmitting data as long as both ends are set up for non-standard transmissions.

qwerty123 · 08-04-2006, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IloveVP

Wondering if you are Sorenson installer. It seems that you know so much about Sorenson but not this LDAP-Core stuff.

me not installer

qwerty123 · 08-04-2006, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

I got it from a manual that I just downloaded from the Sorenson website 2 days ago. It also matches with what is on the box that the VP came in. LDAP is the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol and is used for accessing information directories. I understand that this would be the means of cross referencing a directory of VP's to actual devices. If they don't use LDAP anymore then there must be another means of accomplishing this. I am not here to argue with you as to the accuracy of the Sorenson documentation but if what you say is true, then what did they replace the industry standard LDAP with?

you try envision and webcam and dial to other vp? find out!

IloveVP · 08-04-2006, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis

You need to stop accusing people of working for Sorenson because they're so smart about VRS. Attempting to discredit others by labelling them is a poor way to argue, Sorenson Fanboi.

I understand that blocking port 389 still allows updating of the VP and still receive the list. That would be the only evidence that Sorenson has possibly changed from LDAP to something else. It's also entirely possible that you can access LDAP services from a different port, such as port 80. That's not a big deal, and if you control both ends of the system, you control the transmission. There's lots of tunneling methods that are available out there for transmitting data as long as both ends are set up for non-standard transmissions.

Look who is talking... You have been negative on Sorenson for ages and ages.

Dennis · 08-04-2006, 05:54 PM

While my support for Sorenson is sparse, I do recognize that it exists and has developed some good things for deaf people. So, what, because it's done some apparently unethical things, that it's not okay to dislike them?

Get this. They have been lobbying to the FCC for VRS stuff. You know, sending people to Washington DC to push their various VRS initiatives like the E-911 system. They are suspected of then billing the hotel, flights, hours, meals, etc. to the FCC/NECA as part of their VRS costs. How screwed up is that?

It's in the FCC's ECFS system, the FCC wants YOUR comments on it. I'd LOVE to go on an all-expenses paid trip to visit the FCC and have them pay for everything, AND help my favorite VRS team win too!

diehardbiker · 08-04-2006, 06:08 PM

Same here, Id love to death to get involved with VRS business. I would be dying to quit my job and join the VRS world, *IF* I am getting paid for it. I can't afford paying on my way!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis

While my support for Sorenson is sparse, I do recognize that it exists and has developed some good things for deaf people. So, what, because it's done some apparently unethical things, that it's not okay to dislike them?

Get this. They have been lobbying to the FCC for VRS stuff. You know, sending people to Washington DC to push their various VRS initiatives like the E-911 system. They are suspected of then billing the hotel, flights, hours, meals, etc. to the FCC/NECA as part of their VRS costs. How screwed up is that?

It's in the FCC's ECFS system, the FCC wants YOUR comments on it. I'd LOVE to go on an all-expenses paid trip to visit the FCC and have them pay for everything, AND help my favorite VRS team win too!

IloveVP · 08-04-2006, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis

Get this. They have been lobbying to the FCC for VRS stuff. You know, sending people to Washington DC to push their various VRS initiatives like the E-911 system. They are suspected of then billing the hotel, flights, hours, meals, etc. to the FCC/NECA as part of their VRS costs. How screwed up is that?

Oh really... Is that right ?

Dennis · 08-05-2006, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IloveVP

Oh really... Is that right ?

Yup. Of course, since everything was filed under confidentiality, no one is actually named, but read here:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-106A1.doc

Look under "Legal and Lobbying expenses." $2 million for "some" providers? Methinks only one provider has done that much legal and lobbying work. From the relevant section:

Quote:

For example, is it lawful and reasonable under Section 225 to reimburse travel, hotel, and meal costs associated with lobbying? Are costs associated with setting up web sites and mail campaigns to encourage the general public to lobby the Commission to raise VRS rates appropriate for public funding? Is it reasonable under Section 225 to reimburse legal expenses associated with petitioning for rule changes? Should amounts allowed for legal and lobbying expenses be uniform for all providers, or be tied to the number or minutes of service provided? We also seek comment on any other issues relating to the appropriate compensation of legal, lobbying, and related expenses.

rockdrummer · 08-05-2006, 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

proprietary database since begin 2006

Thanks but what I was asking for is a link or some reference to the technology from the industry.

rockdrummer · 08-05-2006, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IloveVP

Wondering if you are Sorenson installer. It seems that you know so much about Sorenson but not this LDAP-Core stuff.

No, I am not an installer. I am a network engineer. I do know about LDAP but from what qwerty is saying, Sorenson no longer uses LDAP even though their documentation says to open ports on your firewal to all LDAP through.

rockdrummer · 08-05-2006, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

you try envision and webcam and dial to other vp? find out!

Envision is a totally different means and while I'm quite sure it will work, it's not anything I am interested in at this point.

qwerty123 · 08-05-2006, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Envision is a totally different means and while I'm quite sure it will work, it's not anything I am interested in at this point.

envision use ldap but wont work because ldap is not longer service envision wont work with vp numbers

rockdrummer · 08-05-2006, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

envision use ldap but wont work because ldap is not longer service envision wont work with vp numbers

So do you think I should drop my Sorenson and go with a DLINK??? And what about my question before about providing a link or some industry information about CORE. Do you have that? If not, then where did you get your information about CORE? Just curious.

diehardbiker · 08-05-2006, 11:53 AM

FYI DLink and Sorenson VP is pretty much the same thing, the only difference is that it is internal programming part. It is programmed for VP-100 to be more VRS friendly, and deaf friendly. The rest, pretty much the same, even the networking setting and all the stuff. Dlink manufacture both Dlink and manufacture VP-100 for Sorenson.

I have both, and I EVEN tried to set both to work on same WAN line, never made it! Always get conflicts no matter how smart you are. I have known there are plenty of people out there, even networking engineer tried this, none of em have any success.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

So do you think I should drop my Sorenson and go with a DLINK??? And what about my question before about providing a link or some industry information about CORE. Do you have that? If not, then where did you get your information about CORE? Just curious.

qwerty123 · 08-07-2006, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diehardbiker65

FYI DLink and Sorenson VP is pretty much the same thing, the only difference is that it is internal programming part. It is programmed for VP-100 to be more VRS friendly, and deaf friendly. The rest, pretty much the same, even the networking setting and all the stuff. Dlink manufacture both Dlink and manufacture VP-100 for Sorenson.

I have both, and I EVEN tried to set both to work on same WAN line, never made it! Always get conflicts no matter how smart you are. I have known there are plenty of people out there, even networking engineer tried this, none of em have any success.

Rockdrummer
Get what DHB say. CANT and CANT and CANT get both vp (vp100 and dlinK) to work on single WAN line. so much for your 20+ year neworking expereince

me seen certain routers that may not work too well with both vp you turn off one vp and turn on the other, router will not recongize it. netgear routers is know have problem best use dlink 604 or soresnon sr200 router

qwerty123 · 08-07-2006, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

So do you think I should drop my Sorenson and go with a DLINK??? And what about my question before about providing a link or some industry information about CORE. Do you have that? If not, then where did you get your information about CORE? Just curious.

easy to know...try envision

qwerty123 · 08-07-2006, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Thanks but what I was asking for is a link or some reference to the technology from the industry.

ask soresnon people

diehardbiker · 08-07-2006, 03:46 PM

Or even better.... ask DLink technicans and they will give ya hard answer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwerty123

ask soresnon people

rockdrummer · 08-07-2006, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diehardbiker65

Or even better.... ask DLink technicans and they will give ya hard answer.

Geeze guys.. if CORE is a technology that replaces LDAP, I would hope there is information out there somewhere on it. I couldn't find it and I would expect those that told me it was true were able to back up their cliams. Apparantly not.

diehardbiker · 08-07-2006, 07:58 PM

Hey, why is it so hard for you to contact directly to manufacturer and find out the hard answer? You could claim yourself to them (Dlink) that you got networking engineer degree for 20 years and see if they would give you hard answer or two then come back to us?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Geeze guys.. if CORE is a technology that replaces LDAP, I would hope there is information out there somewhere on it. I couldn't find it and I would expect those that told me it was true were able to back up their cliams. Apparantly not.

rockdrummer · 08-07-2006, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diehardbiker65

Hey, why is it so hard for you to contact directly to manufacturer and find out the hard answer? You could claim yourself to them (Dlink) that you got networking engineer degree for 20 years and see if they would give you hard answer or two then come back to us?

I could do that but you are missing the point. Lets rewind a bit. I posted port numbers that Sorenson has listed in their documentation and on the box the VP came in. Then qwerty said that the LDAP port is no longer used and told me it was replaced with some custom database called CORE but he can't back that up with anything. I backed up what I said and posted an excerpt from the manual that shows what I said is true. I also did some research on the web about this CORE and found NOTHING. I am not about to go on a wild goose chase because of someones claims that they cant even back up. Anybody can make claims. If you can't back it up, then I won't take you seriously. And it's not like I didn't look for the information. I did but there wasn't any which leads me to believe that maybe this is just more smoke blowing...

So the point here DHB is that qwerty is disputing what is in the Sorenson documentation but not able to back it up with anything substantial. I'm not saying that the Sorenson documentation is accurate but until I have something concrete that says otherwise, I'll stick with what the manufacture is saying.

Dennis · 08-08-2006, 08:05 AM

rockdrummer, while I'd love to say that qwerty is wrong, there is evidence that blocking the 389 port does not prevent the VP-100 from connecting to the directory. Whether it's still an LDAP server or not, we don't know. Your VP-100 manual was most likely one of a million printed and inserted into your VP a long time ago and given to you as part of their backlog of inventory. So, your manual isn't the latest info, and Sorenson hasn't bothered to update the manual because they're getting the VP-200 out eventually. So why bother to update an expensive document that's going to be phased out anyway?

You're right, though, there's nothing that qwerty says that can be verified on the internet. There's no such thing as CORE out there. Most likely it's just his wording for a custom database directory that he thinks Sorenson made. I've not seen any evidence, BEYOND the blockage of port 389 not being enough to prevent connection to Sorenson's LDAP servers, that states that LDAP is no longer being used.

diehardbiker · 08-08-2006, 08:18 AM

Or that maybe due to vp-100 being phased out and that LDAP might be phasing out too, and that VP-200 MIGHT be using different type of server.,.. who knows? Or Sorenson MIGHT already knew that hackers breaks in their server too easy, too often, so they are updating with their server with newer type with increased security. I don't know, but I DO know their current server is too easy to break in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis

rockdrummer, while I'd love to say that qwerty is wrong, there is evidence that blocking the 389 port does not prevent the VP-100 from connecting to the directory. Whether it's still an LDAP server or not, we don't know. Your VP-100 manual was most likely one of a million printed and inserted into your VP a long time ago and given to you as part of their backlog of inventory. So, your manual isn't the latest info, and Sorenson hasn't bothered to update the manual because they're getting the VP-200 out eventually. So why bother to update an expensive document that's going to be phased out anyway?

You're right, though, there's nothing that qwerty says that can be verified on the internet. There's no such thing as CORE out there. Most likely it's just his wording for a custom database directory that he thinks Sorenson made. I've not seen any evidence, BEYOND the blockage of port 389 not being enough to prevent connection to Sorenson's LDAP servers, that states that LDAP is no longer being used.

rockdrummer · 08-08-2006, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis

rockdrummer, while I'd love to say that qwerty is wrong, there is evidence that blocking the 389 port does not prevent the VP-100 from connecting to the directory. Whether it's still an LDAP server or not, we don't know. Your VP-100 manual was most likely one of a million printed and inserted into your VP a long time ago and given to you as part of their backlog of inventory. So, your manual isn't the latest info, and Sorenson hasn't bothered to update the manual because they're getting the VP-200 out eventually. So why bother to update an expensive document that's going to be phased out anyway?

You're right, though, there's nothing that qwerty says that can be verified on the internet. There's no such thing as CORE out there. Most likely it's just his wording for a custom database directory that he thinks Sorenson made. I've not seen any evidence, BEYOND the blockage of port 389 not being enough to prevent connection to Sorenson's LDAP servers, that states that LDAP is no longer being used.

Thanks for your insight. Actually I just downloaded that manual from their website last week when the topic came up, so I assume it's the latest. Now I know from experience that it's not a perfect world and perhaps the manual is not updated. I can live with that but all I ask for is concrete evidence when someone wants to dispute something. It's real easy to make claims and try to sound intelligent. I'ts a whole different story to back up those claims with something substantial that may show you actually know what you are talking about.

NightwarriorJin · 08-09-2006, 01:35 AM

For CORE... see http://www.sorensonvrs.com/support/updates.php

Scroll down to "Other Features in this Firmware Release"

qwerty123 · 08-09-2006, 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dennis

rockdrummer, while I'd love to say that qwerty is wrong, there is evidence that blocking the 389 port does not prevent the VP-100 from connecting to the directory. Whether it's still an LDAP server or not, we don't know. Your VP-100 manual was most likely one of a million printed and inserted into your VP a long time ago and given to you as part of their backlog of inventory. So, your manual isn't the latest info, and Sorenson hasn't bothered to update the manual because they're getting the VP-200 out eventually. So why bother to update an expensive document that's going to be phased out anyway?

You're right, though, there's nothing that qwerty says that can be verified on the internet. There's no such thing as CORE out there. Most likely it's just his wording for a custom database directory that he thinks Sorenson made. I've not seen any evidence, BEYOND the blockage of port 389 not being enough to prevent connection to Sorenson's LDAP servers, that states that LDAP is no longer being used.

opps dennis you wrong pasted from Soresnon netwrok paper ask soresnon techincle support for user guide page 79

Inbound Ports:
* Port 1720 (TCP & UDP)
* Ports 15328-15333 (TCP & UDP)

Outbound Ports:
* Ports 1024-65535 (TCP & UDP)
* Port 21 (FTP)
* Port 80 (HTTP)

no port 389? mean no ldap vp200 have 500 entry

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

08-04-2006, 05:54 PM	#96 (permalink)
Dennis \/ It's a computer patch. Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Death Star HQ Posts: 1,741	While my support for Sorenson is sparse, I do recognize that it exists and has developed some good things for deaf people. So, what, because it's done some apparently unethical things, that it's not okay to dislike them? Get this. They have been lobbying to the FCC for VRS stuff. You know, sending people to Washington DC to push their various VRS initiatives like the E-911 system. They are suspected of then billing the hotel, flights, hours, meals, etc. to the FCC/NECA as part of their VRS costs. How screwed up is that? It's in the FCC's ECFS system, the FCC wants YOUR comments on it. I'd LOVE to go on an all-expenses paid trip to visit the FCC and have them pay for everything, AND help my favorite VRS team win too!

08-08-2006, 08:05 AM	#113 (permalink)
Dennis \/ It's a computer patch. Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Death Star HQ Posts: 1,741	rockdrummer, while I'd love to say that qwerty is wrong, there is evidence that blocking the 389 port does not prevent the VP-100 from connecting to the directory. Whether it's still an LDAP server or not, we don't know. Your VP-100 manual was most likely one of a million printed and inserted into your VP a long time ago and given to you as part of their backlog of inventory. So, your manual isn't the latest info, and Sorenson hasn't bothered to update the manual because they're getting the VP-200 out eventually. So why bother to update an expensive document that's going to be phased out anyway? You're right, though, there's nothing that qwerty says that can be verified on the internet. There's no such thing as CORE out there. Most likely it's just his wording for a custom database directory that he thinks Sorenson made. I've not seen any evidence, BEYOND the blockage of port 389 not being enough to prevent connection to Sorenson's LDAP servers, that states that LDAP is no longer being used.

08-09-2006, 01:35 AM	#116 (permalink)
NightwarriorJin Darkstalker Guy Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: In middle of nowhere Posts: 178	For CORE... see http://www.sorensonvrs.com/support/updates.php Scroll down to "Other Features in this Firmware Release"