2 Nov
2005
2 Nov
'05
7:31 p.m.
Well, i think the ISP may care if they are also providing similar bussiness.
They won't probably be able to charge neither the voip user or voip
provider, but they can do some harm. Identifying the rtp streams and sip
signalling is not sooo difficult ... then, block a few messages, add delay
and jitter to the rtp (or udp in general ...) and you've got a bad service,
aparently coming from the voip provider.
There is software to detect and do all the above (one was presented in VON
this fall) ...
There was an article in IEEE Spectrum (sept, october, nov ... can't
remember).
And all the tricks Nils mentions ... hey, maybe the advanced user, but my
mom, no way! And then you need software that supports all those tricks ...
that is even further away. In this sense, i think carriers have the winning
side ...
Regards,
Cesc
On 11/2/05, Nils Ohlmeier <lists(a)ohlmeier.org> wrote:
On Wednesday 02 November 2005 14:28, Iqbal wrote:
I agree, I mean the next step would be to charge
ebay and yahoo per
transaction, just wondering how easy it would be for ISP to setup a
monitor and a billing model on this
I think the ISP should not care what it is transporting. The snail mail
also
does not look into what they are devlivering to charge you differently
(except express delivery but thats another story).
As soon as an ISP starts to look into the traffic from the user, the users
will invent uncounted ways of fooling the ISP (use non-standard ports; use
standard ports for the "wrong" service; use proxies; encrypt the traffic;
and
finally combine all this). All I can say to the ISP: happy debugging!
And in the end I would be interested in how a court would judge about the
outcoming bills (who has to prove what?) :-)
Nils
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers