one side recorded calls with oreka
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Why are you happy that it is the ISP doing this, instead of a competent VoIP vendor?
because here in qatar there is only one internet service provider,
you will say to me why you don't subscribe with a voip provider in another country, i will response by saying that the management want real DID (i mean a phone number that resemble the normal phone numbers of qatar 8 digit), a foreign VOIP provider will provide you with virtual DID, also we will have both internet and voip on the same line, in opposition to what we have now, we have a dedicated internet line and a dedicated trunk line for voip -
@scottalanmiller said:
This is a big matter since it is more effort than if you were running the PBX yourself. This undermines all of the value of having someone handle the VoIP for you.
not big matter at all, because what i need is only record calls, and i was doing it successfully for a couple of days ago but because of some reasons the recording server stop record the full call, it record only the internal part of the call, and there are other software that do recording without any issue (i tried them) but they are not free,
now i'm trying to fix the bug in this free software by compiling the last version, if it dosn't work we will buy that commercial software (the last option) -
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Why are you happy that it is the ISP doing this, instead of a competent VoIP vendor?
because here in qatar there is only one internet service provider,
you will say to me why you don't subscribe with a voip provider in another country, i will response by saying that the management want real DID (i mean a phone number that resemble the normal phone numbers of qatar 8 digit), a foreign VOIP provider will provide you with virtual DID, also we will have both internet and voip on the same line, in opposition to what we have now, we have a dedicated internet line and a dedicated trunk line for voipWhat is the difference between a real DID and a virtual DID? How can one tell a "real" from a "virtual" phone number?
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
because here in qatar there is only one internet service provider,
There is no ability to have failover at all? This precludes all business class services at a national level.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
What is the difference between a real DID and a virtual DID? How can one tell a "real" from a "virtual" phone number?
i mean by real number: a phone number that has a format similar to the phone number format provided by the telephone company (ex : 44552233)
and the virtual number is a weird phone number that differ from the local phone number in terms of how much digits, first extention ...... -
@scottalanmiller said:
What is the difference between a real DID and a virtual DID? How can one tell a "real" from a "virtual" phone number?
yes there is only one ISP in qatar (landline not wireless), we have vodafone but they provide only 4G wireless internet connection, as for wired internet connection only one company (the government)
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
What is the difference between a real DID and a virtual DID? How can one tell a "real" from a "virtual" phone number?
yes there is only one ISP in qatar (landline not wireless), we have vodafone but they provide only 4G wireless internet connection, as for wired internet connection only one company (the government)
That's awful. If it was the government acting as a government and not as a company it would be one thing. But to actually shut out telephony vendors and others, that's just a government owned monopoly.
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
What is the difference between a real DID and a virtual DID? How can one tell a "real" from a "virtual" phone number?
i mean by real number: a phone number that has a format similar to the phone number format provided by the telephone company (ex : 44552233)
and the virtual number is a weird phone number that differ from the local phone number in terms of how much digits, first extention ......Oh, refer to the one as a DID and the other as an extension. That's not a virtual DID or anything of the sort. It's literally just an extension.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
That's awful. If it was the government acting as a government and not as a company it would be one thing. But to actually shut out telephony vendors and others, that's just a government owned monopoly.
That's how we used to be. Privatizing the whole of Telstra was the worst move imaginable.
It's not awful if the level of service is good. A 'Free/open Market" does NOT suit every country instantly as it has social requirements that not every country/culture has in place.
Â
While tech changes seemingly by the month, it can take years if not decades to set in place an "open" market.
Â
They may not have had a national level communications disaster yet & as such know nothing of national level critical failures.
-or-
Alternatively, they might have some kind of national level disaster mitigation strategy that we know nothing about. It's not our place to judge their business strategies as we are not privy to that information. -
@nadnerB said:
That's how we used to be. Privatizing the whole of Telstra was the worst move imaginable.
It's not awful if the level of service is good. A 'Free/open Market" does NOT suit every country instantly as it has social requirements that not every country/culture has in place.I actually believe that the government should own all necessarily monopolistic systems, ISPs being one of them (although link redundancy is still a necessity.) The problem comes from blocking products and services that have no reason to be this way. Had the government simply not stopped it, VoIP services would be competitive and available to the OP. The government is actively blocking functioning services from being available in the country that would have been cheap and already available with less effort.
I totally agree that privatization does not always make sense. But there is a big difference between blocking access to existing services and making things a monopoly that have no reason to be.
-
@nadnerB said:
They may not have had a national level communications disaster yet & as such know nothing of national level critical failures.
They have. Whole country went dark a few years ago when a cable in Egypt was cut.
-
@nadnerB said:
Alternatively, they might have some kind of national level disaster mitigation strategy that we know nothing about. It's not our place to judge their business strategies as we are not privy to that information.
Well, it is our place, as it is part of determining how and when you do business or what type of business with the country. Having the government behave as a Comcast, for example, means that datacenters and datacenter service companies avoid the country and go to other countries entirely for services. It means that critical support systems and banking goes to another country because needed redundancy and expertise is not available. If you are in IT, then the infrastructure and decisions of a country are very much something you have to consider.
