🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Yskse.45659$XA6.11387@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>,
R S Prigan  <NO-SPAM-TO-rprigan@insight.rr.com> wrote:
(snip)
>Insight is currently NOT VoIP, but a service over another cable channel
>(separate frequency). **** Apparently they ARE going to go to VoIP at some

Oh, that's interesting. I didn't know such stuff went on.

>I read elsewhere that there might actually be an *advantage* to some of the
>cable provider's services in that they run them over a separate network, to
>be able to counter congestion when the network branch has too many nodes --
>and to provide backup power, etc.

We haven't had any trouble with VoIP, but maybe we're lucky to not
have much local contention for bandwidth. Still, it shouldn't take
much bandwidth to support two-way audio: if their QoS algorithms are
at all reasonable, latency should remain low. I wonder if they've got
their IP routing sensibly organized like that or not. I'll have to try
making calls while doing big uploads or something.

>Q - Regarding your comment on the ironies of modulation going the opposite
>direction from previously,  ...  Have you had any experience using a modem
>to send/receive faxes with your VoIP?  Some providers talk about selling

Not, not at all, I'm afraid.

>add on for fax service, but I think this is just to get a dedicated fax
>line and number?  Have you encoutered difficulties with the essentially
>double modulation demodulation of sending / receiving faxes over VoIP line?

It's an interesting idea. I don't know how well faxing survives the
audio compression that they use, though I find it plausible that it
would work well enough.

Largely it works well enough for me to move image files around on the
Internet, and to give my employer a few cents for occasional use of
the fax machine at work. (-:

-- Mark