Hi.
I am trying to make the Opera_Mini work using JEODE MIDP 2.0 profile.
My service provider does not allow me to make internet connections except for a predefined wap server in my current GPRS Plan. But I have a \'hacked\' IP address and Port through which I can tunnel through to get \'full\'access to the Internet.
Again, I can easily configure NetFront to make use of this proxy for browsing.
The requirement is to make the Opera_mini Midlet to connect using this proxy.
What I have found was the VM uses an APN, instead of the specific proxy&port to connect to the internet.
I tried with a few other VMs like J9. But ALL of them cant tunnel.
I found this information on the MIDP configuration parameter to set the HTTP proxy:-
com.sun.midp.io.http.proxy=<url>:<port>
I am yet to create a link which takes this parameter to the VM as an argument.
Again, I have no clue about the MIDP_HOME parameter value w.r.t JEODE or J9. If so, i could set the same values in the $(MIDP_HOME)/lib/internal.config file - instead of passing as a -D parameter.
Do you think this will work?. Anyone faced any problem with HTTP Proxy setting for vm?
Please let me know!
Thanks in Advance and Regards,
Vinod
I have been attempting to get my HTC Wizard running WM6 working with BT Broadband Voice but I have hit an issue.......
I have managed to get a PC Softphone working with the service (3CX Phone) and have captured the SIP registration with a network Sniffer (Wireshark). I have replicated the settings into the provisioning XML file and installed this on the Wizard through the .CAB method described in another thread. However when using the Wizard I never get a response to any of the registration requests it sends. I have managed to get the Wizard working with a test-lab Asterisk server I have so I know the SIP client works.
The differences in the traces between the PC softphone and WM6 registrations seems to be a 'Branch' message that is sent in the SIP header that isn't sent from the Wizard:
From 3CX Phone:
Code:
P.WES=Dd<Qj(rWREGISTER sip:btsip.bt.com SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.100.60:5061;branch=z9hG4bK8019d72590f1db11be898000600fe800
From: <sip:[email protected]>;tag=16764
To: <sip:[email protected]>
Call-ID: [email protected]
CSeq: 2 REGISTER
Contact: <sip:[email protected]>
Max-Forwards: 70
User-Agent: SIPPER for 3CX Phone
Expires: 0
Content-Length: 0
From WM6:
Code:
[email protected]/->2E>b)REGISTER sip:btsip.bt.com SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.130.1:5061
Max-Forwards: 70
From: <sip:[email protected]>;tag=04d52dd0d6;epid=0ceca78c1f
To: <sip:[email protected]>
Call-ID: 000098f4000012188099efbe2d87c701
CSeq: 1 REGISTER
Contact: <sip:192.168.130.1:5061thods="INVITE, INFO, OPTIONS, BYE, CANCEL, ACK"
User-Agent: RTC/1.5.5374
Event: registration
Content-Length: 0
I am thinking there may be some additional stuff that needs to go into the provisioning file but I am not sure what
Has anyone managed to get this working with BT Broadband Voice? If so what changesdid you have to make? Does anyone know what the 'Branch:' header is and whether this is implemented in the WM6 SIP stack?
Thanks
Andy
Replying to my own posts.....
Right after a bit more playing around and debugging pre and post firewall logs I think I have narrowed this down to being a NAT/Firewall issue.
I originally thought the issue was the lack of the 'Branch' message in the SIP header from the WM6 device - it isn't. It is in fact the 'Contact' header. With the WM6 registration packet this includes the source IP address of the SIP User/Server Agent (the Wizard's SIP Phone) which is using RFC1918 private addressing (sip:192.168.130.1:5061) as I am behind a router/firewall performing NAT. In the 3CX Phone registration it contains the phone number in the Contact header (sip:[email protected]). I checked on my router/firewall and this was not receiving any replies from the SIP Registrar/Proxy, however it was sending the Registrations. Luckily my Router supports SIP Protocol inspection so can intercept the SIP headers and modify them. I enabled this feature and now I can see the router changing the Contact header in the SIP Registrations and can see the replies returning from the SIP Registrar/Proxy
I'll continue testing this and let you know my results..........
Andy
Did you ever resolve this??? I've noticed the same thing, and my SIP provider keeps sending a 400 bad request when trying to register because the contact header isn't how it should be.
chavonbravo said:
Did you ever resolve this??? I've noticed the same thing, and my SIP provider keeps sending a 400 bad request when trying to register because the contact header isn't how it should be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it is resolved but only because my router supports SIP inspection. When my phone attempts to register with BT Broadband my router intercepts the registration packets and replaces the RFC1918 address in the 'contact' header with it's own 'real' IP address.
Andy
Hello everyone,
First off, I apologize if this is the wrong type of question, but you are the only community I know that has the knowledge of the technical details am I looking for. I have asked this in several communities but failed to deliver a proper question and get a proper response. In any case, if you are about to delete this post, please direct me to a more appropriate community.
Here is my train of thought, I hope you can follow:
So, I have this presentation about the Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) which I am having a hard time finding any recent news. All I can find is old articles about WML 2.1 and new phones that support WAP.
The more I search the more I start thinking that WAP is a thing of the past. But the problem is that I am not sure if this is correct. If it is dying, what is replacing it?
The WAP is a stack of 5 protocols. The top one is the application layer which includes the WML language. Under WAP are the various wireless interfaces (CDMA, EDGE, etc). WAP browsers send requests to WAP gateways in order to view a website which is written in (or translated to) WML. So far, so good.
What about Opera Mini??? This a browser designed for mobile phones that is capable of reading HTML (to a degree). How does Opera Mini access the internet? My guess is that it is not using WAP, but the standard TCP/IP stack. Can a cell phone (not a smart phone) use the TCP/IP stack? Is it powerful enough? What about Mobile IP? Is it TCP/Mobile IP?
I know that WAP is still in use. Motorola recently announced a series of low budget cell phones that are WAP-enabled. But doesn't the speed of 3G and the average phone with WiFi support renders WAP useless?
So, I guess my question is: if a mobile phone today (both cell phones and smart phones) access a website using a HTML-capable web browser, does it use the standard TCP/IP stack, a mobile version of it, or each phone has a proprietary model?
Am I even making sense??? :S
Thank you for your patience.
there are still wap pages out there but doubt that will inc
if your network operator support it wap pages will work in any browser
just as ugly www pages
Parts of WAP are still in use, however the majority of it has been replaced.
As I understand it the first version of WAP required special gateways and didn't use HTTP as the application layer. WAP 2.0 however dropped all this rubbish, and just went with HTTP.
In regards to the wireless protocols, the GSM protocols GPRS and EDGE are still used when there is no 3G signal available, however 3G is the preferred method. I don't believe there are any operators who only provide a 3G service without GSM fallback. 3G networks typically use a packet-switched network design for data services, similar to the internet.
The format of the pages themselves is another interesting one. The majority of 'mobile sites' nowadays just use regular HTML, or a subset of it. There are a few different XHTML standards targeted at mobile devices. The level of support varies greatly between handsets, however practically all phones made in the last five years will support some sort of CSS. WML is a markup language designed for WAP usage, however AFAIK it is basically not used now. I don't believe smart phones (Android at least) even support rendering WML pages. WML is an even stricter subset of HTML, and to be honest I don't really think is worth bothering with
Hope this helps, if you want some clarification of anything let me know!
thelucster said:
Parts of WAP are still in use, however the majority of it has been replaced.
As I understand it the first version of WAP required special gateways and didn't use HTTP as the application layer. WAP 2.0 however dropped all this rubbish, and just went with HTTP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was exactly what I wanted to find out. Thank you very much.
So, if I understand this correctly, when a mobile application wants to access a website with standard HTTP, it still uses the WAP 2.0 Stack; correct? If this is true, then Android or iPhone, or WinMo, or the rest, all have the WAP 2.0 stack embedded in their OS? Or is the WAP stack old and it has been replaced by proprietary TCP/IP implementations?
I think I am a little confused :S
thelucster said:
WML is a markup language designed for WAP usage, however AFAIK it is basically not used now. I don't believe smart phones (Android at least) even support rendering WML pages. WML is an even stricter subset of HTML, and to be honest I don't really think is worth bothering with
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, WML was for WAP 1.0. WAP 2.0 supports XHTML Mobile Profile. So since there is no WAP 1.0 there is probably no WML also.
thelucster said:
Hope this helps, if you want some clarification of anything let me know!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It indeed helped. Thank you very much.
Hi, this thread has some factual errors, so figured it may be valuable for someone who looks for information and ends up here, to have a set of good information available in the thread.
kimolias said:
So, if I understand this correctly, when a mobile application wants to access a website with standard HTTP, it still uses the WAP 2.0 Stack; correct? If this is true, then Android or iPhone, or WinMo, or the rest, all have the WAP 2.0 stack embedded in their OS? Or is the WAP stack old and it has been replaced by proprietary TCP/IP implementations?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure what "mobile applications" that want to access websites you are talking about. The typical apps available on a device from the factory that need to connect somewhere are Browser, MMS and Email applications. Of these, the Browser is the one that wants to access a website and the browser has built-in the protocols it needs.
And also to clarify lets make it clear that WAP specs includes both specs for markup language (how to display the content) as well as transport protocols (how to send/get the data). But, for this post I will only comment on the data transport protocols and completely ignore the markup languages (WML, xHTML-MP and HTML) and how or where they are used.
BROWSER
Let's split the Browser into two types of browser first, to make things a little more clear.
1) WEB Browser
2) WAP Browser
The WEB Browser uses the "regular" HTTP protocol to connect directly to webserver (on top of TCP/IP provided by the operating system) to get content.
The WAP Browser can use WAP 1.2 (Wireless Session Protocol/Wireless Transaction Layer) to connect to a WAP Gateway, and the WAP Gateway in turn uses regular HTTP to get the content from the webserver.
The WAP Browser can use WAP 2.0 (Mobile Profile HTTP) to connect to a WAP Proxy, and the WAP Proxy uses regular HTTP to get the content from the webserver.
I do not want to make this confusing by even mentioning the secured versions of the above, cause it's messy.
MMS (a.k.a picture messaging)
Multimedia Messaging also uses WAP. When a MMS Message is sent to a cellphone recipient, the cellphone actually only receives a SMS message (a.k.a. text message) which includes a Notification that a new MMS message exists. Then, the cellphone must open a data connection (GPRS,3G, CDMA or whatever the device/carrier uses) and then use WAP 1.2 or WAP 2.0 to connect to a WAP Proxy or WAP Gateway and then use that connection to download the actual MMS Message. When sending messages the cellphone also uses WAP 1.2 or WAP 2.0 and WAP Gateway/Proxy to deliver the message to the carriers MMSC (Multimedia messaging center).
EMAIL
Email has it's own set of data transport protocols. Depending on the users account it could use protocols like POP3 or IMAP to receive and manage the arriving emails. To send, it could use the SMTP protocol. Unless, it's a Microsoft Exchange email client and uses MS proprietary protocols.
Conclusion so far: As you can see, "mobile apps" can use a variety of protocols to get or send data over wireless connections. Generally the only thing they have in common is that they all ride on top of TCP/IP and the operating system creates that TCP/IP layer on top of the wireless technology (GSM/CDMA/3G/4G/WiFI etc) connection.
To return to the original question of whether WAP still is in use (in 2010), the answer is that WAP in use in almost every handset on the market and doing well. However, it is the WAP protocol stack that today is the important part of the technology. WAP 2.0 pages (xHTML-MP formatted) are also very common and ringtone delivery pages etc all use this over WAP connections as this way the carriers can charge for the content with your monthly bill. Without it, they can't control the payments and credit cards or other means must be use.
Further, if you buy a ringtone or similar by sending a text somewhere, you get a WAP Push message in return with a link for downloading the content. This link would not work over regular HTTP as then the carrier can't track if you downloaded the content you paid for or not.
For Android or Meego or other "new" popular platforms, the OEM maufacturers of devices can buy the WAP Stack's for WAP connectivity or MMS from companies like Winwap Technologies (winwap.com) that specifically provide such technolgy for the manfuacturer.
In the end, the consumer does not need to know if HTTP, WAP or something else is used as long as they get what they paid for and want.
Hope this helps somebody?
Cheers,
Aaron (a developer of mobile that's been around too long...)
TEXT, MMS, and Email formats
I may not be using the proper verbage however I am hoping the process/question is clear.
Are the different protocols used for the three above needed for actual transport of the specific message types etc?
I am assuming the phone / computer / ??? has the protocol to play/view. Could they all be sent via sms text type format. Message plus attachment sent via wifi? once reaching destination program opens them ?
I am sure you woule need applet and servlet but is there a protocol that can do that without using a cellconnection plus data connection?
t_galownia said:
TEXT, MMS, and Email formats
Are the different protocols used for the three above needed for actual transport of the specific message types etc?
I am assuming the phone / computer / ??? has the protocol to play/view. Could they all be sent via sms text type format. Message plus attachment sent via wifi? once reaching destination program opens them ?
I am sure you woule need applet and servlet but is there a protocol that can do that without using a cellconnection plus data connection?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Generally anything is possible if you have access to the infrastructure. But, if you are not a telecom carrier or big enough OEM manufacturer - your only choice is to use what is available.
EMAIL: WiFi is fine for email, but you still need to run SMTP on top of WiFi to send the actual email to some SMTP server.
MMS: WiFi is not fine for MMS, unless you have MM7 or other special access to the telecom operators MMS Center.
TEXT: WiFi can not be used. TEXT (correctly called SMS or Short Message Service) uses it's own protocol that's built into the GSM/CDMA protocols. Impossible to send over WiFi unless you use WiFi to send to your own server where you have an actual wireless modem that sends out the TEXT (or again; you can probably pay your telecom carrier and spend money to build a system that let's you send your TEXT over WiFi to some server that handles the rest for you).
hope this helps...
Excellent feedback
abbe-dev said:
Hi, this thread has some factual errors, so figured it may be valuable for someone who looks for information and ends up here, to have a set of good information available in the thread.
I am not sure what "mobile applications" that want to access websites you are talking about. The typical apps available on a device from the factory that need to connect somewhere are Browser, MMS and Email applications. Of these, the Browser is the one that wants to access a website and the browser has built-in the protocols it needs.
And also to clarify lets make it clear that WAP specs includes both specs for markup language (how to display the content) as well as transport protocols (how to send/get the data). But, for this post I will only comment on the data transport protocols and completely ignore the markup languages (WML, xHTML-MP and HTML) and how or where they are used.
BROWSER
Let's split the Browser into two types of browser first, to make things a little more clear.
1) WEB Browser
2) WAP Browser
The WEB Browser uses the "regular" HTTP protocol to connect directly to webserver (on top of TCP/IP provided by the operating system) to get content.
The WAP Browser can use WAP 1.2 (Wireless Session Protocol/Wireless Transaction Layer) to connect to a WAP Gateway, and the WAP Gateway in turn uses regular HTTP to get the content from the webserver.
The WAP Browser can use WAP 2.0 (Mobile Profile HTTP) to connect to a WAP Proxy, and the WAP Proxy uses regular HTTP to get the content from the webserver.
I do not want to make this confusing by even mentioning the secured versions of the above, cause it's messy.
MMS (a.k.a picture messaging)
Multimedia Messaging also uses WAP. When a MMS Message is sent to a cellphone recipient, the cellphone actually only receives a SMS message (a.k.a. text message) which includes a Notification that a new MMS message exists. Then, the cellphone must open a data connection (GPRS,3G, CDMA or whatever the device/carrier uses) and then use WAP 1.2 or WAP 2.0 to connect to a WAP Proxy or WAP Gateway and then use that connection to download the actual MMS Message. When sending messages the cellphone also uses WAP 1.2 or WAP 2.0 and WAP Gateway/Proxy to deliver the message to the carriers MMSC (Multimedia messaging center).
EMAIL
Email has it's own set of data transport protocols. Depending on the users account it could use protocols like POP3 or IMAP to receive and manage the arriving emails. To send, it could use the SMTP protocol. Unless, it's a Microsoft Exchange email client and uses MS proprietary protocols.
Conclusion so far: As you can see, "mobile apps" can use a variety of protocols to get or send data over wireless connections. Generally the only thing they have in common is that they all ride on top of TCP/IP and the operating system creates that TCP/IP layer on top of the wireless technology (GSM/CDMA/3G/4G/WiFI etc) connection.
To return to the original question of whether WAP still is in use (in 2010), the answer is that WAP in use in almost every handset on the market and doing well. However, it is the WAP protocol stack that today is the important part of the technology. WAP 2.0 pages (xHTML-MP formatted) are also very common and ringtone delivery pages etc all use this over WAP connections as this way the carriers can charge for the content with your monthly bill. Without it, they can't control the payments and credit cards or other means must be use.
Further, if you buy a ringtone or similar by sending a text somewhere, you get a WAP Push message in return with a link for downloading the content. This link would not work over regular HTTP as then the carrier can't track if you downloaded the content you paid for or not.
For Android or Meego or other "new" popular platforms, the OEM maufacturers of devices can buy the WAP Stack's for WAP connectivity or MMS from companies like Winwap Technologies (winwap.com) that specifically provide such technolgy for the manfuacturer.
In the end, the consumer does not need to know if HTTP, WAP or something else is used as long as they get what they paid for and want.
Hope this helps somebody?
Cheers,
Aaron (a developer of mobile that's been around too long...)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
**************************************************************************************************************************************************************
What could be the wayout to retrieve MDN information without using WAP Proxy in a CDMA environment?
This can be achieved for Non-WAP during A11 authentication. Thoughts and expert advise needed.
Regards,