Airave hacking. Home cell network? VoIP? Possible? - Hardware Hacking General

I have a really off the wall question here. Since the airave is basically a short range cellular antennae I assume that it would be possible to program what it broadcasts. Would it be possible to modify the airave so that it connects to and broadcasts normal cable or dsl internet so that it can be accessed by the phones connected to it, and would it also be possible to program it to use either the landline or voip service, preferably google voice. Then couldn't we write a custom PRL to only connect to our airave, and have the airave set to a unique tower ID so it wont conflict with official towers?

xplus93 said:
I have a really off the wall question here. Since the airave is basically a short range cellular antennae I assume that it would be possible to program what it broadcasts. Would it be possible to modify the airave so that it connects to and broadcasts normal cable or dsl internet so that it can be accessed by the phones connected to it, and would it also be possible to program it to use either the landline or voip service, preferably google voice. Then couldn't we write a custom PRL to only connect to our airave, and have the airave set to a unique tower ID so it wont conflict with official towers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe the company that made Magic Jack tried to do this, and got lawsuits off the ying yang by Phone companies. So it definitely is possible. How difficult it is going to be to do this is beyond my level of intellect.

I thought I had responded to this but it is going to be hard. Very very hard. First and foremost those devices are built for one thing changing that functionality is going to be hard. I'm sure it already has a unique tower id, the problem is changing the routing. It is probably hard coded in how to route calls, changing that is going to be difficult, and I be the protocol is proprietary and encrypted.
The next thing is the legal aspect, the frequencies they operate on are private, as in we can't use them.

xplus93 said:
I have a really off the wall question here. Since the airave is basically a short range cellular antennae I assume that it would be possible to program what it broadcasts. Would it be possible to modify the airave so that it connects to and broadcasts normal cable or dsl internet so that it can be accessed by the phones connected to it, and would it also be possible to program it to use either the landline or voip service, preferably google voice. Then couldn't we write a custom PRL to only connect to our airave, and have the airave set to a unique tower ID so it wont conflict with official towers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I work for the Corporate Technical Support Team for these devices. Basically there is not much you can do with it. There are some neat features inside of the device which you can mess with extending the range, and Allowing more users than normally allowed. But the device, built by Ericsson is made specifically to connect to one Sprint tower within 15 miles of your home location, once authorized it outputs an EVDO signal for your phone. Everything else is done by your internet. Flashing a PRL won't do anything but brick it, since Verizon does not carry this product, and the GSM Giants have a different version of it that will not authenticate. So creating a personal network is not really a viable option.
Just like a vonage box or any other VoIP device, it has to authenticate somehow. The only thing I see even remotely possible is that you can [maybe] alter the devices firmware to allow multiple authentication channels. Even still the data would be reported to Airvana, Sprint, and Ericsson and it would probably term your service. Same thing when people flash phones over to the Verizon PRL. It gets noticed quickly, and Sprint will proactively cancel your account if there is anything fishy.
My only recommendation to you is that you buy one outright, not connected to any account, and then begin the modding experiements.
I am to assume you have the Airvana AP, or do you have the Samsung Airave?

voip with mobile phone is blocked by our profiders in the netherlands >.<

Voip
I setup voip on my LG Vortex vs660, all you need is groove ip and google voice and one legit# just get a walmart prepay phone register with that number then get ur phone# from google and don't port anthing. Add voice to ur regular phone and then on the google voice site have your calls forwarded to your gmail address and that will be attached to your regular phone. You can then use whatever network ur on to take in/out calls on the data network. All you need is wifi to make and takes calls, why the attn? I have an inactive non activated phone and I'm on mediacom's network with topped out 1ghz upstream which is plenty for decent quality calls. More up is better but work wit what u have. If you need help or need info on setup in detail let me know I wrote an 18 page paper on the subject, just an indepth view that will explain everything and whqt settings to use. Get ahold of me if you need it.
xplus93 said:
I have a really off the wall question here. Since the airave is basically a short range cellular antennae I assume that it would be possible to program what it broadcasts. Would it be possible to modify the airave so that it connects to and broadcasts normal cable or dsl internet so that it can be accessed by the phones connected to it, and would it also be possible to program it to use either the landline or voip service, preferably google voice. Then couldn't we write a custom PRL to only connect to our airave, and have the airave set to a unique tower ID so it wont conflict with official towers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

The custom prl would be on the phone. Basically i want to use it and my old sprint phone as a super fancy high tech cordless phone system for my house. Apparently as i thought its locked down tight.

[email protected] said:
I work for the Corporate Technical Support Team for these devices. Basically there is not much you can do with it. There are some neat features inside of the device which you can mess with extending the range, and Allowing more users than normally allowed. But the device, built by Ericsson is made specifically to connect to one Sprint tower within 15 miles of your home location, once authorized it outputs an EVDO signal for your phone. Everything else is done by your internet. Flashing a PRL won't do anything but brick it, since Verizon does not carry this product, and the GSM Giants have a different version of it that will not authenticate. So creating a personal network is not really a viable option.
Just like a vonage box or any other VoIP device, it has to authenticate somehow. The only thing I see even remotely possible is that you can [maybe] alter the devices firmware to allow multiple authentication channels. Even still the data would be reported to Airvana, Sprint, and Ericsson and it would probably term your service. Same thing when people flash phones over to the Verizon PRL. It gets noticed quickly, and Sprint will proactively cancel your account if there is anything fishy.
My only recommendation to you is that you buy one outright, not connected to any account, and then begin the modding experiements.
I am to assume you have the Airvana AP, or do you have the Samsung Airave?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is exactly what I am looking for. Any links?

Using Net10 with Sprint Air Rave
I used to have an account with Sprint also using an air rave. Worked fine till I switched over to Net10 with my same Sprint phones. I am still on the Sprint network but getting billed from Net10 at 45% less per month still using the Sprint network. So how can I use the Air Rave now? Or do I have to have an active open account with Sprint to use it?

I stay in India .. Can you help me to setup everything and does it costs money... I am in 8th class... I don't have much money
Sent from my Micromax AQ4501 using XDA Free mobile app

Related

Mobile Data, not as easy as you'd think.

This is an interesting subject to me as the company I work for is acutally in the business of providing a service just as being discussed.
I'm not going to turn this into an advert, but let me give you a quick overview of our service. We run a fully mananged network which connects to a customers office network and to the 4 major MNO's in the UK (plus a few outside the UK, and were expanding). We have at least two private AP's on each MNO plus terminals can connect via a VPN over the internet. We support a number of terminals (mainly from HTC from the Wallaby to the Prophet, but also some from Panasonic, Symbol and Intermec) that connect VIA GPRS but also through GSM DUN as a fallback.
I've worked on the terminal side for about 7 years, I've been involved in development of most areas of the code at one time or another, but for a long time I was responsible for the module that is responsible for connecting to and maintaining the connection to either the MNO network (our AP's or the Public AP) or our own network (via GSM).
The one thing I've learned while doing this is that you can't rely on the MNO for anything. We've had MNO's disconnect us from AP's without warning, we've had IP connections stop passing data again without warning, we've had AP's reject a connection when out auth server told the AP to accept it.
This being true, if your claiming your software is reliable and expecting someone to bet their business on using it, you'd better make sure that it can handle all these issue. Theres nothing worse than trying to explain to a customer why his message didn't go through when both the back-end office and mobile device claim their connected.
And one last thing, and its a big one, Cost. Its easy to make a system that costs so much to run that its economically unviable. Remember every GPRS byte or GSM second costs money, so polling for messages every few seconds may not be a great idea.
Hurm....
This was supposed to be a reply to this thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/viewtopic.php?t=43426
I have no idea how it got into its own thread...
Appologies.
That is exactly my point of veiw. Why have to be constantly connected? Its a dirty solution. The only ones who benifit from a middle man are the service providers. Thats why I have put all my effort into using what is reliable. A normal phone call.
I have spent the last 9 months creating something that can reliably transfer data over calls. When I say reliable I mean when data is sent the user will get a confirmation for each packet sent an can be 100% certain it arrived intact when with the confirmation.
Depending on the phone plan it can be cheaper than other means of communication like gprs and mms on phones. When there is no flag fall I can transfer the same data as an mms (on my account anyway) for about half the cost. In free times transmition can be free. What makes the technology usefull is the price. In Australia all forms of data transfer are VERY high, but that is not the case in other countries.
You miss my point somewhat. I don't know about Australia but here in the UK your not actually charged for having a GPRS connection up and running just for the data you transfer over it and so our GPRS connections are up all the time assuming you have coverage. Its how you manage the connection (detecting the IP layer stopping working for example) and the data that flows over it thats important.
When it comes to GSM though your right, there is no way you want to have a permanent connection up, it has to be on-demand based. That in itself leads to problems, the main being that you have to handle charging your customer for the data calls you make to the terminal. Or if you don't connect to the terminal, and it only connects to you, how does the terminal know when messages are waiting.
For us, GSM us a last-ditch solution when GPRS isn't available. However in the UK we've generally found that if you can make a GSM call you can connect to GPRS, and if GPRS is down for some reason, the whole cell is generally not available (so GSM doesn't work either). There are occasions where a hardware failure on a MNO (not at the cell but in the rest of the network) may cause GPRS to stop working but allow GSM to work but situations like that are rare and generally quickly rectified by the MNO.

Using your HTC Wizard to dial out on a analog phone line or Tiscali DSL Phone

Hi guys,
I want to use my HTC Wizard to call out on the "normal" or DSL phone line when I am at home. This beacause all phone calls to all national non mobile numbers are free.
My PC is connected to the DSL Modem (ZYXEL P-2602HW-D1A) and with a modem connected to the phone out put of the modem and to the normal analog line.
Is there any one who has experience with this?
MartindH said:
Hi guys,
I want to use my HTC Wizard to call out on the "normal" or DSL phone line when I am at home. This beacause all phone calls to all national non mobile numbers are free.
My PC is connected to the DSL Modem (ZYXEL P-2602HW-D1A) and with a modem connected to the phone out put of the modem and to the normal analog line.
Is there any one who has experience with this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The answer is likely to not be as easy as you expect, although it may not be that hard.
Your modem may or may not work, when you do voice over a modem the modem needs to know this and not demand a carrier tone and other things that signal a data connection. Some modems are known to work in this capacity others are known to work very poorly (lots of echo) and others are known to not work at all. The majority of modems are not known whether or not they will work at all.
In short the easiest way to accomplish this task is to send data from your phone VoIP to your PC. There are free clients out there such as sjphone from sjlabs.com. You will likely want a headset on your phone as most dont use the same speaker as a regular phone call but instead the speakerphone and echo cancelation doesnt work well (the remote side will hear echo without headphones).
Now that your phone is taken care of you need something on the other side. Here you have choices. If you have a compatible modem you can use that as an FXO card with software like asterisk.org and soon freeswitch.org. If you do not have a compatible card, or do not wish to run VoIP software on your PC you can get an ATA that has an FXO port and lets you route calls to/from it. Grandstream.com has some, the HT486 comes to mind. I believe the linksys pap2 will also do this. Ebay may be your friend in locating a fairly cheap one, although they arent that expensive - and you are doing this to save money so depending on the number of calls you make it may pay for itself soon
Once you have this set up, you can actually choose to call people via your mobile plan or landline or even an internet based telephone company. Depending on how well you configure everything, you could in theory have it use all of those things, and you can even route calls from those services to your phone (ie get phone numers all over the world and answer them on your mda when you have internet).
All your mda needs is wifi/usb/gprs. And for those providers that block VoIP on gprs shame on you (and they generally dont block vpn traffic or even know what the contents of that are
Port restricted Cone NAT
Thanks for your support.
The WIFI way with a direct connetion to my Modem will do for now, but I have got the following problem there.
The error that is displayed is the following:
NAT/Firewall: Port Restricted Cone NAT
The settings which I have entered are the same as in my Modem:
Zyxel: P-2602HW-D1A
Provider Tiscali
Anybody who knows how to solve this or who has experience with VOIP provided by Tiscali or other ISP using your HTC Wizard

How GPRS works.

I have recently been told the following about the way carriers figure out GPRS charges. This is something they were apparently told by someone at O2 UK, but I thought I would check whether it is or is not BS....
Since GPRS is an always on service the network doesn't monitor when you use it. THE PHONE DOES. The phone/sim card records information on data transferred and then once in a while uploads that information to the O2 network this is why your GPRS charges may appear on your bill way after you actually used it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now this raises two issues in my mind.
1) If your phone does the calculations and your phone is hackable, why do people not get free data?
2) This doesn't agree with what I know about networks and how to use them. Surely my phone goes onto a carriers network and gets a private IP, will navigate through a NAT to pick up my email or browse the web and network management tools on the carriers network wil monitor what traffic I cause and this will be polled at the end of the day, thereby accounting for the delay.
Which leads me to a final question - if I am right and the quote is incorrect, how are IPs allocated? Are they static to accounts? (They are private so the carriers could have 256^3 entries) Or are they dynamic? (Because they are lazy and would rather try to update tables as old dial-up ISPs used to do).
Any feedback and/or corrections greatly appreciated.
I can't say one way or another with certainty, but my logic agrees with your conclusions. Like you said, someone would have hacked it by now.
Aside from that, I have a couple different phones that I frequently switch my SIM between. What if I use a bunch of data on phone A, then swap my SIM over to phone B, and leave phone A off for weeks or months? Or for that matter, what if I am using one phone with two different SIMs? Say I use a bunch of data on SIM A which has a data plan, then swap in SIM B with no data plan, and then the phone decides to report my day's usage to the network?
I have to think that the phone company tracks data usage my IP. When you request data, the network must have to identify your SIM as being attached to an account with a data plan. Even if they assign a different IP for each session, that IP would still be tied to your SIM. I have to think that they meter your data by your IP address.
If anyone knows for sure (or can poke holes in my logic) I'd love to hear it.
i believe this is the old case of not always being the best and brigtest who are in customer contact support
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Packet_Radio_Service
there are countless cases of support and sales people speaking out their rear end
it would be crazy to put the phone itself in charge of keeping track of what was downloaded
when it's not the case of normal phone calls or sms's or mms's (which also use gprs)
or old analog modems for pc's which is the closest thing one can compare gprs with
could also be something he said to get people to buy grps monitoring software rather then bothering him about their usage or asking for them to supply a service for users to see
and maybe even limit their usage and cost the company a bit of overusage income

positioning software?

Is there software that will tell me my Longitude and Latitude either via wifi or cell reception?
both are means to connecting to something that something have to sendt those positions back you can compare wifi and gprs/edge/umts as usb cables which are just long range and wireless and in some cases you pay for using
they can only send you data which data depend on which services they provide
and of cause internet but internet knows no locations alone
well is there software that can estimate, based on wifi(location of the router)?
only if the router knows and provide it's location
software is just a list of requests to and from users and services
it cant get any infomation not provided by some source
so there is nothing that will use wifi or cell reception? Damn. Can google earth do it?
try looking here for the feature
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=gsm+positioning&btnG=Search&lr=lang_da|lang_en
Google Maps can estimate your position (within about 1500 feet on my Treo 750), but that is because it identifies the cell towers you are connecting to and compares it to a database that Google has built/is building that has the locations of these towers. AFAIK there is no publicly available database that anyone can use.
As far as mapping by WiFi access points, there has been some talk of this being done in the future, but I don't see it being feasible.
turns out my carrier doesn't allow the use of this via cell tower.
I could be wrong, but I don't think this is carrier dependent. I think Google Maps just reads the cell tower you're connected with from the phone's OS and then compares it to Google's database. Their database is self-created -- when you opt to use the 'My Location' feature you have to agree to allow Google to collect information on which towers you are connecting to so they can enhance their database.
Perhaps your carrier is blocking the phone from uniquely identifying the cell site. I'm not too sure about the technical side of what happens between the phone and the tower when you are registered on a network... maybe someone more knowledgeable than I could clarify this.
FWIW I'm on T-Mobile (US) and it works great.
i believe it is
all i believe that googlemap server can see is
the cellphone operators gateways ip
so on it's own i dont believe it can see which
tower it's comming from
same reason why people can use unlocked wifi network to do crime
and it looks like it's the wifi router owner who do it
Does each cell tower have a unique IP?
no each tower are not even connect to the internet thats the issue
unless the owner of all the towers pass on location along with data
servers on the internet only see 1! gateway as all traffic comming from
the phonecompany
I am connecting via wifi, but my cell provider blocked their cell tower from accepting software like this, because they want you to use their service for a fee. However, they only offer it on their certain phones and WM, BB or even Palm are not included.
Who is your provider?
VZW. I think it is a cdma thing as my friend with a Mogul on Sprint has the same issue. Unless it is a carrier thing?
I just did some reading on Google's discussion boards and it sounds like you are right about Verizon disabling this capability. I think they must disable it on the phone though, they would rather make you pay for their Navigator service. There was one guy who said he had it working on a BlackBerry on VZW. FWIW it sounds like Sprint is doing the same thing.
Boo Verizon for loading BS feature-blocking firmware on all their phones.
what about this one?
http://www.loki.com/how-it-works/determining-location.html
well my buddy with a Mogul also has his disable or what not.
The reason I can't see WiFi positioning being feasible is they will never map out enough APs to make it worthwhile. IP positioning is very inaccurate, and WiFi SSIDs are duplicated enormously, so they would have to build up a database of APs' MAC addresses. I can't imagine too many people are going to volunteer their MAC, so it would have to rely on wardriving, and honestly, how many APs don't have encryption these days?
I tried loki and it seems like its not working eventhough I am in their coverage area. Odd.
I agree wifi is not the best option, I'd rather see cell reception stuff growing more. That is along side with GPS if your phone does not support gps.

Free microcell for me

Well today I finally had enough of my crappy lack of coverage with att, and called their cancelations line.
Once on the line I asked how much it would cost me to cut ties with them. The csr on the phone gave me the info and then asked why I wanted to leave them. I was honest and told them I didn't want to leave but as it stands, I have virtually no coverage where I live and can not make phone calls. I also explained that it had been that way for years and I was tired of having no service and having to call and register complaints daily.
Well after I finished he told me I could have a microcell for free. He notated my account and then told me to just stop by the local store and they would give it to me.
I now have a nice little microcell in the house.
Figured I would share with all those who Need one and can't get it.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
So you're paying to fix AT&T's problem? MicroCell's are the second biggest scam on the planet.
barry99705 said:
So you're paying to fix AT&T's problem? MicroCell's are the second biggest scam on the planet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He said it was free..how is he paying?I mean yeah he has to pay for his service but thats nothing new, he'd been doing that...
barry99705 said:
So you're paying to fix AT&T's problem? MicroCell's are the second biggest scam on the planet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you had read my other post on this subject a month ago, you would know my thoughts on microcells and AT&Ts scam. Trust me, I ranted and raved enough on it.
The device itself is a good idea as a great deal of my calls are VOIP calls anyways. If I am going to use my network to make phone calls, I might as well use the Micro Cell I got for free to make certain my business clients can call me when I am at home.
As for the plan they offer, I did not need to sign up for the $20 a month plan for unlimited calling because with A List, Mobile to Mobile, Night and weekends, and 1400 minutes with rollover, I never need extra minutes. I think I used 800 minutes last month on the minutes portion and probably 3000 plus on the other portions.
Remember, the microcell only works with my devices or ones I list (up to 10) so everyone else in my neighborhood can either kiss off or go get their own.
joshyy_rey said:
He said it was free..how is he paying?I mean yeah he has to pay for his service but thats nothing new, he'd been doing that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because he is using his electricity and bandwidth because AT&T's inadequate network. I think the microcell is a crock too. Whats a even bigger crock is people tht have to pay for it. Not only they pay for the device, an extra fee in addition to the above.
I would rather see them adopt Tmobile's Wifi calling.. Free, no extra devices to plug in, and it's use is purely up to the user.
I have spotty coverage at home and work. Should I have to buy two microcells or use use the existing Wifi at both locations?
My .02
joshyy_rey said:
He said it was free..how is he paying?I mean yeah he has to pay for his service but thats nothing new, he'd been doing that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless AT&T is reimbursing him for the data, he's paying for it. Doesn't matter if he would have already had internet service or not. With microcells the carrier doesn't have to fix their network, they just have to sell people these little boxes and still charge too much for their service.
DarrellRaines said:
Remember, the microcell only works with my devices or ones I list (up to 10) so everyone else in my neighborhood can either kiss off or go get their own.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool, they changed the software then. Before it was those 10 get preference, but there was no way to exempt other phones from using it.
"I would rather see them adopt Tmobile's Wifi calling.. Free, no extra devices to plug in, and it's use is purely up to the user."
Since this is about an ANDROID phone...You can do the same thing, unlimited WiFi VOIP calling with your Atrix and any WiFi connection.
The poorly documented solution is to get a GoogleVoice number, and enable GVoice on your cell phone. Once you enable it, it will always pop up before a call is placed, asking you if you want to place it with GVoice (over WiFi) or not. If you select GVoice it uses your GVoice number and the free wifi. If you say not, it uses the cellular.
And if you just give people your GVoice number, you get their calls no matter where you are or what phone is ringing, they all work together. You just don't need to give out your cell phone number, you just say "this (gvoice) number rings all my phones."
There's a lot more it can do.
Rred said:
"I would rather see them adopt Tmobile's Wifi calling.. Free, no extra devices to plug in, and it's use is purely up to the user."
Since this is about an ANDROID phone...You can do the same thing, unlimited WiFi VOIP calling with your Atrix and any WiFi connection.
The poorly documented solution is to get a GoogleVoice number, and enable GVoice on your cell phone. Once you enable it, it will always pop up before a call is placed, asking you if you want to place it with GVoice (over WiFi) or not. If you select GVoice it uses your GVoice number and the free wifi. If you say not, it uses the cellular.
And if you just give people your GVoice number, you get their calls no matter where you are or what phone is ringing, they all work together. You just don't need to give out your cell phone number, you just say "this (gvoice) number rings all my phones."
There's a lot more it can do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I finally got that working with PBXes and Sipdroid but it wasn't nearly user friendly as T-Mo's official offering. My biggest qualm was having my google password stored insecurely on PBXes servers.
Sorry for the threadjack
Rred said:
"I would rather see them adopt Tmobile's Wifi calling.. Free, no extra devices to plug in, and it's use is purely up to the user."
Since this is about an ANDROID phone...You can do the same thing, unlimited WiFi VOIP calling with your Atrix and any WiFi connection.
The poorly documented solution is to get a GoogleVoice number, and enable GVoice on your cell phone. Once you enable it, it will always pop up before a call is placed, asking you if you want to place it with GVoice (over WiFi) or not. If you select GVoice it uses your GVoice number and the free wifi. If you say not, it uses the cellular.
And if you just give people your GVoice number, you get their calls no matter where you are or what phone is ringing, they all work together. You just don't need to give out your cell phone number, you just say "this (gvoice) number rings all my phones."
There's a lot more it can do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google Voice uses data to tell Google that you are dialing through the google voice number. It has never been wifi calling and it probably never will be. I don't know where you got that idea, I've been using google voice since day one. The only 'wifi' part is if you call from google talk or gmail. (Why can't you call on the Google Voice page???)
scoob8000 said:
Because he is using his electricity and bandwidth because AT&T's inadequate network. I think the microcell is a crock too. Whats a even bigger crock is people tht have to pay for it. Not only they pay for the device, an extra fee in addition to the above.
I would rather see them adopt Tmobile's Wifi calling.. Free, no extra devices to plug in, and it's use is purely up to the user.
I have spotty coverage at home and work. Should I have to buy two microcells or use use the existing Wifi at both locations?
My .02
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahhh gotcha..never really looked at it that way ha
barry99705 said:
Unless AT&T is reimbursing him for the data, he's paying for it. Doesn't matter if he would have already had internet service or not. With microcells the carrier doesn't have to fix their network, they just have to sell people these little boxes and still charge too much for their service.
Cool, they changed the software then. Before it was those 10 get preference, but there was no way to exempt other phones from using it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've had the microcell from the day it launched. I always had to authorize a number before it could connect to the microcell.
Guys, I posted this as a help post for those that need it, not to start an argument over our crappy carriers towers.
Yes I am using my bandwidth and electricity, but i am willing to sacrifice a. Dollar or two a. Month for better service and considering I have a 60 meg down and 6 meg up circuit, I think I can spare the bandwidth.
For those who don't know, you don't have to have the unlimited $20 a month microcell calling feature if you don't want it.
Now let's just. Let those who need the information and device know how to get. If. Free.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Before it was those 10 get preference, but there was no way to exempt other phones from using it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wrong. I wont elaborate, your just wrong.
Kind of related and kind of not:
Today for the first time I had to unplug the microcell and use Atts service at the house.. I was uploading (a lot of) music to the cloud and on Charter I only get 2up. I could hear everybody just fine (download), but I was told my words (upload) were cutting in and out. Only one bar here w Att but it was better than with the Mcell, or so I was told. First time thats happened in a year, but def not the first time Ive been uploading + talking.
I love people that hate on the micro cell. If you have bad service with Verizon, guess what your options are? Shove off, or go to RadioShack and buy a signal repeater, which the cheapest one is $250 and can only support one active connection at a time. You'll spend $350-$400 for on one that can support up to 4 connections. Oh, and if it can't grab signal, your sol. No, AT&T isn't going to spend $6m to put a tower in everyone's backyard. Almost everyone who is in a bad coverage area has a free MicroCell offer on their account. Go to your local store, and ask them to check your PCA, they will probably have you listed for a free one, then your on your way. If a microcell uses $0.10 in electricity per month, I'd be surprised.
The micro cell has always forced you to provision 10 numbers, and all others can not access your data. Don't make stuff up just to make someone look bad please.
WiredPirate said:
Wrong. I wont elaborate, your just wrong.
Kind of related and kind of not:
Today for the first time I had to unplug the microcell and use Atts service at the house.. I was uploading (a lot of) music to the cloud and on Charter I only get 2up. I could hear everybody just fine (download), but I was told my words (upload) were cutting in and out. Only one bar here w Att but it was better than with the Mcell, or so I was told. First time thats happened in a year, but def not the first time Ive been uploading + talking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you a google music beta user? If so the app by dsfualt uses the maximum bandwidth possible for uploads. Try dropping the upload to a max of 512kps or switch you router to use qos for the device.
Just a thought.
For all you fks arvueing about the google voice calling, i assure you, google voice is not a voip client by default. It does nit give you wifi calling. It only connects to data the first few seconds in order to make the call and then you use you regular cell minutes.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
link12245 said:
I love people that hate on the micro cell. If you have bad service with Verizon, guess what your options are? Shove off, or go to RadioShack and buy a signal repeater, which the cheapest one is $250 and can only support one active connection at a time. You'll spend $350-$400 for on one that can support up to 4 connections. Oh, and if it can't grab signal, your sol. No, AT&T isn't going to spend $6m to put a tower in everyone's backyard. Almost everyone who is in a bad coverage area has a free MicroCell offer on their account. Go to your local store, and ask them to check your PCA, they will probably have you listed for a free one, then your on your way. If a microcell uses $0.10 in electricity per month, I'd be surprised.
The micro cell has always forced you to provision 10 numbers, and all others can not access your data. Don't make stuff up just to make someone look bad please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More wrong.
Verizon has a femtocell too, its called the "network extender".
Whats with all the misinformation in this thread!?
DarrellRaines said:
Are you a google music beta user? If so the app by dsfualt uses the maximum bandwidth possible for uploads. Try dropping the upload to a max of 512kps or switch you router to use qos for the device.
Just a thought.
For all you fks arvueing about the google voice calling, i assure you, google voice is not a voip client by default. It does nit give you wifi calling. It only connects to data the first few seconds in order to make the call and then you use you regular cell minutes.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the gMusic tip, I have that account but Im using mostly Amazon.
I had thought about the setting the QoS, i may search for the ports later today.
GrooveIP will let you make calls with your GV# over internet, no service, no sim required.
Mgamerz, you shold try reading a post and then finding out for yourself if it is true, before you say it is impossible.
Let me repeat this in small clear words: YOU CAN PLACE GVOICE CALLS, USING YOUR WIFI CONNECTION AND ZERO CELLULAR DATA OR VOICE TIME, FROM ANY ANDROID PHONE.
The Google Voice software that ships for every Android phone, has a POORLY DOCUMENTED OPTION that allows for a pop-up box on the cell phone every time you place an outgoing call. Assuming thta your cell phone HAS A WIFI RADIO and HAS AN ACTIVE WIFI CONNECTION, to your own router, or Starbuck's, or whoever?
That pop-up tells GVoice to either:
a) place the call use GVoice over Wifi instead of using the cellular system, having GVoice connect to both parties the same way it would if you placed the call from your computer, or
b) step aside and let the cell phone place a celluar call over the cell system as it normally would.
If you have an Android phone, and you have Google Voice installed on it, look at the options to "Use Google Voice". It isn't obvious, but it is there, and I use it every day without using any cellular minutes. My counter widgets confirm this. So does my bill.
OH DUH! The geeks at Google are just real real poor at documentation. With all their products, not just this one.
Rred said:
Mgamerz, you shold try reading a post and then finding out for yourself if it is true, before you say it is impossible.
Let me repeat this in small clear words: YOU CAN PLACE GVOICE CALLS, USING YOUR WIFI CONNECTION AND ZERO CELLULAR DATA OR VOICE TIME, FROM ANY ANDROID PHONE.
The Google Voice software that ships for every Android phone, has a POORLY DOCUMENTED OPTION that allows for a pop-up box on the cell phone every time you place an outgoing call. Assuming thta your cell phone HAS A WIFI RADIO and HAS AN ACTIVE WIFI CONNECTION, to your own router, or Starbuck's, or whoever?
That pop-up tells GVoice to either:
a) place the call use GVoice over Wifi instead of using the cellular system, having GVoice connect to both parties the same way it would if you placed the call from your computer, or
b) step aside and let the cell phone place a celluar call over the cell system as it normally would.
If you have an Android phone, and you have Google Voice installed on it, look at the options to "Use Google Voice". It isn't obvious, but it is there, and I use it every day without using any cellular minutes. My counter widgets confirm this. So does my bill.
OH DUH! The geeks at Google are just real real poor at documentation. With all their products, not just this one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow at the lies.
Take your sim card out, you wont be able to make calls. Same if you dont have cell coverage, you WONT be able to make calls. Unless you are using GrooveIP, this app will allow voip calling w/o coverage.
Google voice alone will not provide a true VOIP calling experience, you must also have cell coverage. The end.
Rred said:
Mgamerz, you shold try reading a post and then finding out for yourself if it is true, before you say it is impossible.
Let me repeat this in small clear words: YOU CAN PLACE GVOICE CALLS, USING YOUR WIFI CONNECTION AND ZERO CELLULAR DATA OR VOICE TIME, FROM ANY ANDROID PHONE.
The Google Voice software that ships for every Android phone, has a POORLY DOCUMENTED OPTION that allows for a pop-up box on the cell phone every time you place an outgoing call. Assuming thta your cell phone HAS A WIFI RADIO and HAS AN ACTIVE WIFI CONNECTION, to your own router, or Starbuck's, or whoever?
That pop-up tells GVoice to either:
a) place the call use GVoice over Wifi instead of using the cellular system, having GVoice connect to both parties the same way it would if you placed the call from your computer, or
b) step aside and let the cell phone place a celluar call over the cell system as it normally would.
If you have an Android phone, and you have Google Voice installed on it, look at the options to "Use Google Voice". It isn't obvious, but it is there, and I use it every day without using any cellular minutes. My counter widgets confirm this. So does my bill.
OH DUH! The geeks at Google are just real real poor at documentation. With all their products, not just this one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow you sir are an idiot. That function is to send out the calls via you gv number or your cell number, not route all calls through a magical nonexistent voip service that google offers.
Wiredpirate is correct that the only way to do it is through a voice service that he mentioned or through another sip gateway
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

Categories

Resources