[kwlug-disc] OT: Another voip.ms troubleshooting question

unsolicited unsolicited at swiz.ca
Tue Aug 28 09:17:13 EDT 2012


On 08/27/2012 03:18 PM, Bob Jonkman wrote:
> Cable is broadband, so there are multiple channels on a single cable.
> One channel for your plain old Internet, another channel for their
> proprietary VOIP, and 500 channels of stuff on the TV to choose from.

But, IIRC, one modem. So multiple channels is in some sense a red 
herring, here.

And you're mixing 'channels' here.

In the end, all data, VoIP, internet, TV, is multiplexed together at the 
modem, going across the cable line as data. Call it the data pipe, as 
that's all it is. Modems are (today) multi-channel (as in cable data 
pipe channels) aware. This is why the cable change to 50Mbps service 
(read, equipment updated at Roger's end) required customers to change 
modems to take advantage of the higher speeds. Not that they were 
offered 50Mbps, but the new modems (typically DOCSIS 3) are 
multi-channel capable (or, at least, going from using 2 channels, to 
capable of using 4 or 6. The latest recommended modem does 8, but 
Roger's currently doesn't bond that many. As of the last time I looked, 
a few months back.)

Modems, DTA (Digital Terminal Adapters), and I suspect VoIP (ATA) boxes, 
are merely analog to digital (and vice versa) converters (modems) from 
the cable signal to IP, and, particularly, DHCP recipients based upon 
MAC address. Digital TV is just another form of internet service, 
dedicated to your TV. (Receiving all TV channels via 1 data channel, 
between Roger's and your DTA.) VoIP will be the same.

I apologize, I know I'm contradicting myself here, and confusing things, 
but in the end, one box (cable modem / internet, DTA / TV, Home Phone 
'Home Phone Terminal' / ata?), per service, are modems (using multiple 
data channels across the cable wire) / dhcp endpoints, using a single 
channel (in the end user's perception), although multiple TV channels 
are available across that 1 data channel. [IIRC, the reason for the 
delay in changing channels is telling the Rogers end to switch tv (IP 
Data) streams being sent to you - unlike analog which sends all channels 
all the time for your tv to pay attention to or not, digital only sends 
the broadcast you're tuned to at the moment.] Somewhere above is also 
why you must have one DTA box per TV.

=====
 From - 
http://www.rogers.com/web/Rogers.portal?No=100&_nfpb=true&Ntt=home%20phone&_pageLabel=search&N=14: 
How is this different from Voice Over IP (VOIP) telephone services?
-----
Will network maintenance to other Rogers services such as Digital Cable 
or Rogers Hi-Speed Internet affect my telephone service as well?

Rogers Home Phone uses the same physical cable as your other services. 
However, the data and services will be routed through a dedicated, 
monitored network. Our Network Engineering team carefully plans each 
maintenance event to ensure that activity to upgrade and improve one 
service does not impact other services. For example, when maintenance is 
performed on Rogers Digital Cable Network, it rarely impacts Hi-Speed 
service.
-----
Rogers Home Phone service does not require or use the public Internet as 
VOIP services do. This difference ensures that potential slow-downs that 
occur as a result of load and other factors on the Internet do not affect
Rogers Home Phone. Using a state-of-the art, managed, dedicated network, 
Rogers Home Phone service provides our customers with high-quality, 
robust telephone services. Rogers Home Phone service is not VOIP. Rogers 
Home Phone service is delivered over the Rogers privately owned and 
monitored secure packet cable network that is NOT accessible to the 
general public, unlike VOIP services that run over the public internet.
=====

So, as I've said elsewhere, it's VoIP, just over a private subnet.

Confirmed in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Telecom.

I can't seem to dig up any home phone ('RHP') wiring diagrams, but I do 
see that they only rent the equipment, and an installer must come to 
your home to set it up. And there is a battery, so they are also 'UPS'es.

AFAIK, each such box takes a cable connector in. Rogers splits your 
cable, one line off to each box. (Also giving them the ability to charge 
you for a second TV outlet, DTA box, plus ...)

> P-O-I will eventually get routed to the Toronto interchange, but I
> speculate that the 500 channels get provisioned locally (so you end up
> with different TV channel assignments in KW than you do in Hamilton).
> And I speculate that the proprietary VOIP gets linked the telephone
> system at one of the local Bell exchanges.

True on the TV side. But ... it's all just data. Likely multicast from 
Rogers central to the regional distribution centers. When you tune to a 
channel, they add you to that multicast. (Granted a 'sub-' or 're-' 
multicast?)

I'm not / wouldn't be too sure about the local phone interconnects.

If you're doing long distance, particularly to other countries, that may 
make little sense. If you're calling another Roger's home phone or cell 
number, it wouldn't make sense to route the traffic outside your own 
internal (Rogers) networks if they're just going to come back in after 
transiting a 3rd party. I'll bet different distribution paths are 
individually optimized. e.g. I suspect when internal lines are 
saturated, long distance calls to BC will go out over Bell microwave for 
some portion of the transit.

I've no doubt it's all very complex. IIUC most phone lines are digital 
(at least once it hits the C.O. / and probably some form akin to IP) - 
it's all just data, routing, and distribution.

VoIP coming over the cable into my home that I'm already paying internet 
fees for, then trying to have me pay even more for the same cable and 
bandwidth, let alone at a price premium for the same old same old. Yet 
if I put a competitor on it it has to travel through the artificially 
limited current (internet) service where it does not get 'advantaged' by 
not being disadvantaged (rate limited / shaped).

Bah!

Personally, I'll not reward Rogers by paying more for what I already 
have. I won't get dedicated bandwidth, and lower call quality as a 
result, but at least what I do pay in addition will be competitively priced.

YMMV.

I must say, give my own recent experience learning to live with Linux, 
I've come to appreciate why some will pay more (for Windows or Mac) for 
fire and forget. I've no doubt the same is true for Roger's VoIP vs 
others. For the non-technically interested, paying more for peace of 
mind and simplicity is obviously attractive, given the success of the 
service offerings.

Also, given this thread and the internet searching I've been doing 
because of it ... I can't say as I've noticed any evening internet speed 
slowdowns in some while. IIRC, Rogers was making network improvements 
all over the place, hitting K-W some number of months ago.

> On 12-08-27 01:31 PM, unsolicited wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/27/2012 11:34 AM, Charles M wrote:
>>> I think what Jason is pointing out is that Rogers doesn't run their VOIP
>>> service over the same line they run all the other cable traffic.
>>
>> (I assume) of course they must. There's only one line going into my
>> home. They're not going to split out my cable to separate lines at one
>> point, then double wire back to their main internet backbone points. And
>> they probably don't have all required telco interconnects at each
>> Roger's distribution point. (e.g. Grand Crest Place, in Kitchener.) I
>> expect they route all voice to Front St. and telco interconnect there.
>> Especially for international calls. Much cheaper to use your own AT&T
>> U.S. interconnect at Front St. than pay Bell (especially if you're
>> Rogers) to do so on your behalf. It's not like they'd lay another fibre
>> between here and T.O. just to carry VoIP.
>>
>> It's all just IP. Carrying voice. Thus VoIP. All else is marketing
>> babble, with Rogers artificially limiting the bandwidth I get to use
>> over my wire with paid internet service, then crying poor that those
>> nasty pirate video downloaders are sucking up all our precious bandwidth.
>>
>> Hogwash.
>>
>>> Can they
>>> shape it? Sure they can and they likely do some QoS over it and may well
>>> share it with other Rogers VOIP customers. I believe what Jason is
>>> getting
>>> at is that they appear not to allow other non-VOIP traffic on that cable
>>> line.
>>
>> Course they do, it's all one modem into my home, be it voip, internet,
>> or both. (Not speaking from experience. Could be two modems, but that
>> doesn't make a lot of sense, and as I recall from looking at the wiring
>> diagrams a few years back.)
>>
>>> We had Rogers home phone service for several years and didn't have
>>> some of
>>> the problems we've had going with a different VOIP solution (calling
>>> cards,
>>> etc.). Not being a fan of Rogers we switched almost all our services
>>> away.
>>> The phone service was the one service I occasionally miss from them.
>>
>> Yep, (artificially) dedicated bandwidth at noncompetitive prices will do
>> that for you.
>>
>> Especially when they downshape your internet traffic, which your
>> non-Rogers VoIP would have to go over.
>>
>> What a racket.
>>
>> * Disclaimer: Not speaking from Roger's or VoIP experience, but very
>> tired of Roger's snake oil marketing.
>>
>> It will just be a separate subnet, and that subnet given a higher
>> priority queue.
>>
>>
>> Who was it mentioned in the list some months back as doing competitive
>> home phone service, EyeSurf? Can anyone make comments as to how their
>> service stacks up?
>>
>> I wonder how much of the non-Rogers VoIP issues go back to things people
>> such as John have mentioned in the past, or technical issues with the
>> net - I'm thinking for example of QoS not properly implemented across
>> the net, or Paul's discovery of the need for registering by IP instead
>> of DNS name / need for static NAT.
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 11:07 AM, unsolicited <unsolicited at swiz.ca>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have to disagree. VoIP is VoIP. Private (inter)network, or no. That
>>>> Roger's can then do funny things to shape the traffic and provide it
>>>> better
>>>> service and QoS over its regular internet offerings (uncompetitive
>>>> advantage) ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 08/27/2012 09:49 AM, Jason Locklin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also, while Rogers home phone uses VOIP technology, it's not really
>>>>> comparable and in no way touches the Internet. It works on a private
>>>>> local area network with it's own modems on Rogers coax -and is
>>>>> unrelated, and unconnected to the Rogers Internet service. It's a very
>>>>> robust service, but should be thought of as "digital phone service over
>>>>> cable" and not VOIP.



More information about the kwlug-disc mailing list