FCC and 10 digits is a milestone but not 100% freedom

Deaf Mortgage

New Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
909
Reaction score
0
I applaud to FCC and 10 digit ruling.

HOWEVER, the law is written as one 10 digit number to a device. Means you only can have one device per 10 digit. This give us 90% freedom but not 100% freedom.

PROBLEM, hearing house hold has several phone in the house and can answer from Kitchen, or living room or bedroom. We cannot do this way if the ruling is set as one 10 digit per device. Mean my kitchen VP will be different number than living room.

I rather to see the FCC to modify the ruling. Have 10 digit to be tied to one HUB videophone where it can ring all videophone and can be answered anywhere in the house.

I know deaf seniors will love this because they cannot get out of bed and walk to videophone in living room to answer. Not fast enough. So if videophone is in bedroom and same number as living room, it will be easier for them to walk to nearest videophone than running across the house or home or condo to get to the videophone they want to answer. If they fell down in bedroom, they can dial 911 from bedroom, not have to crawl to living room to dial 911.

Another good reason for tying to one Hub videophone is for families. Supposed mother is in kitchen and father is away from home. Mother watching the kids playing outside. Phone rings, mother cannot answer the phone in living room because she will be out of sight of the kid. So she has to ignore the important calls just to watch the kid. If the kid come in, then mother can follow up with the miss call. Yet safety is another issue.

We need to reconsider what FCC and 10 digit ruling to one videophone device. We need freedom!

If you know the link to FCC, please clarify how to send open complaint to FCC about the ruling to 1 videophone tied to one 10 digits. We need like 8 videophone to one 10 digit. Easier that way and give family and seniors freedom of where their videophone in the house. Not limit to one room or one videophone.

We need the freedom!
 

Secretblend

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
4,797
Reaction score
117
I applaud to FCC and 10 digit ruling.

HOWEVER, the law is written as one 10 digit number to a device. Means you only can have one device per 10 digit. This give us 90% freedom but not 100% freedom.

PROBLEM, hearing house hold has several phone in the house and can answer from Kitchen, or living room or bedroom. We cannot do this way if the ruling is set as one 10 digit per device. Mean my kitchen VP will be different number than living room.

I rather to see the FCC to modify the ruling. Have 10 digit to be tied to one HUB videophone where it can ring all videophone and can be answered anywhere in the house.

I know deaf seniors will love this because they cannot get out of bed and walk to videophone in living room to answer. Not fast enough. So if videophone is in bedroom and same number as living room, it will be easier for them to walk to nearest videophone than running across the house or home or condo to get to the videophone they want to answer. If they fell down in bedroom, they can dial 911 from bedroom, not have to crawl to living room to dial 911.

Another good reason for tying to one Hub videophone is for families. Supposed mother is in kitchen and father is away from home. Mother watching the kids playing outside. Phone rings, mother cannot answer the phone in living room because she will be out of sight of the kid. So she has to ignore the important calls just to watch the kid. If the kid come in, then mother can follow up with the miss call. Yet safety is another issue.

We need to reconsider what FCC and 10 digit ruling to one videophone device. We need freedom!

If you know the link to FCC, please clarify how to send open complaint to FCC about the ruling to 1 videophone tied to one 10 digits. We need like 8 videophone to one 10 digit. Easier that way and give family and seniors freedom of where their videophone in the house. Not limit to one room or one videophone.

We need the freedom!


To me that should be an easy fix. Just set up a network around the house similar to how the telephone works. They will just need to modify the vp software so that it all can work off of one number. Shouldn't be that hard.
 

Deaf Mortgage

New Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
909
Reaction score
0
To me that should be an easy fix. Just set up a network around the house similar to how the telephone works. They will just need to modify the vp software so that it all can work off of one number. Shouldn't be that hard.

The law of FCC ruling is not written that way. So we need to speak up and get 100% freedom.

I know this is easy fix to do but law is what determine how VRS function and how they operate their videophone. We need to speak up on that matter.
 

Secretblend

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
4,797
Reaction score
117
The law of FCC ruling is not written that way. So we need to speak up and get 100% freedom.

I know this is easy fix to do but law is what determine how VRS function and how they operate their videophone. We need to speak up on that matter.

Well, at least they made a step in right direction.
 

JClarke

AD Veteran
Premium Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2006
Messages
28,871
Reaction score
25
Yet, I am still impressed. Like what secretblend said - there is a network setting that can modify the videophone, what if they are ALL plugged into ONE router, hmm? I believe ALL of them would go off, eh.
 

web730

New Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
2,270
Reaction score
1
The law of FCC ruling is not written that way. So we need to speak up and get 100% freedom.

I know this is easy fix to do but law is what determine how VRS function and how they operate their videophone. We need to speak up on that matter.

Yes, I agree that is something amiss about the FCC rule... however, I would say it's a great milestone for the most reasons but believe that something could be missing just like you explained.

Like some users don't want some people knowing their single ten-digit numbers so they couldn't provide vp address or like that instead either. Know what I meant, I hope. We shall see how it fares, I guess.
 

Deaf Mortgage

New Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
909
Reaction score
0
Yet, I am still impressed. Like what secretblend said - there is a network setting that can modify the videophone, what if they are ALL plugged into ONE router, hmm? I believe ALL of them would go off, eh.

Network right now not allowing that. I can have two sorenson vp200 on my same router but both are different phone number. (i dont own two sorenson VP200, it can be done with Dlink DVC-1000 but same issue).

That what we can do right now. FCC is leading to that direction too. We need to have FCC to change one more tiny issue to guide to right path. That is to allow us to set up central HUB videophone. That is easy to do but FCC decides what VRS can and cant do with their videophone devices and products.

So we need to complain to FCC about that. I dont want to wait 5 years for that to happen. I am soon to be a father and need to have quick access to videophone with same phone number on all floor in the house and majority of room in the house. Easier that way than I have to run across the house to answer to one specific videophone.
 

Deaf Mortgage

New Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
909
Reaction score
0
Yes, I agree that is something amiss about the FCC rule... however, I would say it's a great milestone for the most reasons but believe that something could be missing just like you explained.

Like some users don't want some people knowing their single ten-digit numbers so they couldn't provide vp address or like that instead either. Know what I meant, I hope. We shall see how it fares, I guess.

Likewise to hearing people. They do not pass out their phone number wildly. We do the same, we will be treated the same as hearing people. I am certain there will be caller block if needed. I wouldnt pass out my personal home phone number. Only business number.

I want full access in every room of the home that I live in. Just what hearing people can do with their telephone. I want single 10 digit to be connected to as many as 8 videophone as needed. Ring at same time regardless which room I am in. This can be done if FCC ruling allow VRS to use the product to do the same thing.

Our fate of equality is in FCC's hand as to allow us do this.
 

web730

New Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
2,270
Reaction score
1
Likewise to hearing people. They do not pass out their phone number wildly. We do the same, we will be treated the same as hearing people. I am certain there will be caller block if needed. I wouldnt pass out my personal home phone number. Only business number.

I want full access in every room of the home that I live in. Just what hearing people can do with their telephone. I want single 10 digit to be connected to as many as 8 videophone as needed. Ring at same time regardless which room I am in. This can be done if FCC ruling allow VRS to use the product to do the same thing.

Our fate of equality is in FCC's hand as to allow us do this.

Yeah! But seldomly few others did pass my numbers to others whom bothered me before so I had to change the numbers manually and let my circle of friends know about the number change.

So I wonder as if we could change whenever that happens like I said above?

I'm still stuck with the vp-100 which doesn't have a block feature. Does the vp-200 has the block feature?

So let's say if both vp types don't have it, then do we have the capability to change numbers if needed going with the single 10-digit numbers only?
 

diehardbiker

Active Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Messages
16,191
Reaction score
16
To better understand how networking works, all Internet network based on IPv4 which is a protocol used in Internet system, that version has set of rules and how they were set up. There is no way to work around the rules that has been set years ago, and will always continue no matter what.

The simple rule is that each machines connects to Internet must have its own unique IP address, that way packets can be sent and recieve without going into other machines.

Of course router's job is to share one public IP address into inside networking system. That router assigns private IP address within inside the network, they have to follow the NAT rules, and it applies same thing, each machine must have its own unique IP address.

But that is not the problem causing anyone not able to have more than 1 VP at same time. The real problem is that with any routers, it can assign a port forward to ONLY one private IP address at a time, and they are not shareable. We have 65535 ports in our Internet system, and VP uses about 21 ports that needed to be used on. So, once these 21 port is assigned to VP A then the VP B will not be able to be assigned the same port. That is real problem. Its all about rules and technical limits set by Internet system.

I do not know about the effect on new Internet version IPv6 which should be release in future, don't ask me when. They may or may not solve the problem with multiple VP in same networking. BTW, the real number may solve the problem with IPv6 because their ip address format looks much like MAC ID and can be confused to general people. IPv4 has easier IP address than IPv6, FYI
 

Deaf Mortgage

New Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
909
Reaction score
0
Yeah! But seldomly few others did pass my numbers to others whom bothered me before so I had to change the numbers manually and let my circle of friends know about the number change.

So I wonder as if we could change whenever that happens like I said above?

I'm still stuck with the vp-100 which doesn't have a block feature. Does the vp-200 has the block feature?

So let's say if both vp types don't have it, then do we have the capability to change numbers if needed going with the single 10-digit numbers only?

You have choices by request VRS to assign you new number when needed. You can keep the number as you switch vrs as well. Or switch to get new number.
 

Deaf Mortgage

New Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
909
Reaction score
0
To better understand how networking works, all Internet network based on IPv4 which is a protocol used in Internet system, that version has set of rules and how they were set up. There is no way to work around the rules that has been set years ago, and will always continue no matter what.

The simple rule is that each machines connects to Internet must have its own unique IP address, that way packets can be sent and recieve without going into other machines.

Of course router's job is to share one public IP address into inside networking system. That router assigns private IP address within inside the network, they have to follow the NAT rules, and it applies same thing, each machine must have its own unique IP address.

But that is not the problem causing anyone not able to have more than 1 VP at same time. The real problem is that with any routers, it can assign a port forward to ONLY one private IP address at a time, and they are not shareable. We have 65535 ports in our Internet system, and VP uses about 21 ports that needed to be used on. So, once these 21 port is assigned to VP A then the VP B will not be able to be assigned the same port. That is real problem. Its all about rules and technical limits set by Internet system.

I do not know about the effect on new Internet version IPv6 which should be release in future, don't ask me when. They may or may not solve the problem with multiple VP in same networking. BTW, the real number may solve the problem with IPv6 because their ip address format looks much like MAC ID and can be confused to general people. IPv4 has easier IP address than IPv6, FYI

The computer program can be written anytime to modify this situation. Supposed if able to create a videophone hub switchboard. Where its assigned one IP address for the hub but allow the hub send signal to all videophones. Once one answer, then all other will be shut down. The concept is easy to do.

Right now my debate at the point is FCC wrote law to assign single 10 digit to one videophone. That mean if you have 8 videophone, you will get 8 different 10 digits. I want one 10 digits number to all 8 videophone.

The point of this debate is to send complaint to FCC about the ruling. I want more freedom. Skype have alot features they can do and do more than we can do. They have phone over internet. Why not us? Their number is real number and we with proxy. But now FCC ruling demands we get real number but still not 100% to Skype's system.
 

DeafCruise

New Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
170
Reaction score
0
The computer program can be written anytime to modify this situation. Supposed if able to create a videophone hub switchboard. Where its assigned one IP address for the hub but allow the hub send signal to all videophones. Once one answer, then all other will be shut down. The concept is easy to do.

Right now my debate at the point is FCC wrote law to assign single 10 digit to one videophone. That mean if you have 8 videophone, you will get 8 different 10 digits. I want one 10 digits number to all 8 videophone.

The point of this debate is to send complaint to FCC about the ruling. I want more freedom. Skype have alot features they can do and do more than we can do. They have phone over internet. Why not us? Their number is real number and we with proxy. But now FCC ruling demands we get real number but still not 100% to Skype's system.

Keep in mind, phone or pbx system has been around for many years. videophone is just brand new. I'll give it time maybe 2 years.. Most of them get vp-100 and 200 are free. Hearing can't. that's different.

Speaking of freedom, it's not exactly freedom. What you wanted is more flexible option set up for vp! Solution, single user login, and add new vp-100 or vp-200 mac address and one phone number will point to several mac address at once. Whoever call that number will be auto route and signals to vp(s).

There is no known software for hub router for vp signals as you mention above yet. Unless, you can develop one and give to every router makers. Not just giving them, but you will have to get IEEE organization standard to ratify it first, then pass it along to router makers! That's pretty long.
 

IslandBreeze07

New Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2008
Messages
450
Reaction score
0
Appreciate all this information going on in this thread. Here's a question.

What's the BEST thing for someone who doesn't do VP much, use laptop based relay services and want to open up to cold-calling both hearies and deafies? I've only discovered viable vision, oovoo, and etc. I have had Sorenson for almost two years BUT I cut out the high speed access needed for it. I am willing to go back up but I am going wireless too!

Needlesss to say I'm a little overwhelmed with so much electronic information!:ty:
 

PowerON

Active Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2007
Messages
11,266
Reaction score
10
Network right now not allowing that. I can have two sorenson vp200 on my same router but both are different phone number. (i dont own two sorenson VP200, it can be done with Dlink DVC-1000 but same issue).

That what we can do right now. FCC is leading to that direction too. We need to have FCC to change one more tiny issue to guide to right path. That is to allow us to set up central HUB videophone. That is easy to do but FCC decides what VRS can and cant do with their videophone devices and products.

So we need to complain to FCC about that. I dont want to wait 5 years for that to happen. I am soon to be a father and need to have quick access to videophone with same phone number on all floor in the house and majority of room in the house. Easier that way than I have to run across the house to answer to one specific videophone.

From what I not see that I have seen friend and his roommate have their own videophone, both are different number. However, whatever someone call this person, it also appear the incoming call on display on both!
 

Deaf Mortgage

New Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
909
Reaction score
0
Keep in mind, phone or pbx system has been around for many years. videophone is just brand new. I'll give it time maybe 2 years.. Most of them get vp-100 and 200 are free. Hearing can't. that's different.

Speaking of freedom, it's not exactly freedom. What you wanted is more flexible option set up for vp! Solution, single user login, and add new vp-100 or vp-200 mac address and one phone number will point to several mac address at once. Whoever call that number will be auto route and signals to vp(s).

There is no known software for hub router for vp signals as you mention above yet. Unless, you can develop one and give to every router makers. Not just giving them, but you will have to get IEEE organization standard to ratify it first, then pass it along to router makers! That's pretty long.

Good wording with this quote.

CSDVRS will sell their three products. That opens to hearing and coda to purchase the products. We cannot stay in freebie mode all the time. It a milestone since VRS launched. I dont want to wait for another two years to finally get what I want. It better start now as we go with technology. The technology is out but we not creative with VRS and deaf community. We need to be creative and develop more friendly to all user.

AGBell invented Telephone and now widely used both deaf and hearing.

Thomas Edison is hard of hearing and invented light blub. Now widely used by all people.

Now deaf has impacted the hearing community in most subtle way. This is our chance to do it again and change the technology to better path. This technology can be done and then hearing will want to use the system easily. My family will join me with this technology.
 

Deaf Mortgage

New Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
909
Reaction score
0
Appreciate all this information going on in this thread. Here's a question.

What's the BEST thing for someone who doesn't do VP much, use laptop based relay services and want to open up to cold-calling both hearies and deafies? I've only discovered viable vision, oovoo, and etc. I have had Sorenson for almost two years BUT I cut out the high speed access needed for it. I am willing to go back up but I am going wireless too!

Needlesss to say I'm a little overwhelmed with so much electronic information!:ty:

CSDVRS has three products coming out as the Z family. They supposed to announce at NAD conference this week. One of the product is PC based for laptop to call out and call in. I am not sure how it works exactly. They are the inventor of the 10 digit from Personal 800 number. FCC really liked their idea and other VRS now joining the bandwagon on this 10 digits.

Hovrs has new MVP and Sign 3.0 coming out soon. Sign 3.0 should work perfectly call out and call in. They brag about 10 digit number with their product too.

I am strong supporter of CSDVRS and HOVRS. I want to see them develop more services that is more compatible to deaf and hard of hearing community.

The idea I am suggesting about standard videophone hub that will regulate the videophone in the house will be best for deaf community. Easier to work with and flexible.

I think CSDVRS Z family can easily work with videophone hub if the FCC will allow that. Right now FCC ruling does not allow this. Therefore nobody will spend the time and energy on developing videophone HUB.

I want you all to know about this option and send complaint to FCC. Just go to FCC website and send e-complaint about VRS and Videophone product. The more people send complaint the more likely they will immediately change the law to more appropriate.

Think about closed caption law now is outdated. 13 inches or greater is the closed caption law required. Not counting Ipod, Internet based etc... So they are now writing new law about closed caption issue to apply to regardless what kind of technology exist.

We can do the same with videophone.
 

Deaf Mortgage

New Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
909
Reaction score
0
From what I not see that I have seen friend and his roommate have their own videophone, both are different number. However, whatever someone call this person, it also appear the incoming call on display on both!

That because you and your friend are sharing same Public IP address. Both are stored on two different 10 digit proxy name with same IP address. That cause conflict.

That create problem if you have home business and home number. You can purchase additional IP address to resolve that issue. Easily to be done for time being. You will need to work in the router to assign each mac number to each public ip address you purchase. For two videophone, two public ip address to keep separated. I believe that call Port forwarding.

I want to emphasize the freedom of one Public IP address to One 10 Digits number to several Videophone in the house. That will create more freedom for families, senior citizens, and physical disabilities.

Think outside of the box of what you can benefit from the FCC ruling.
 
Top