OT: Bezek via netvision

[Yuval Hager]

On Sunday 28 February 2010, geoffrey mendelson wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2010, at 5:54 PM, Yuval Hager wrote:
> > According to their support guy (who sound very knowledgable), since
> > I have
> > HOT infrastructure, no dialer, and a router, they simply connect
> > their box
> > to *my* router, as an additional client. This means that no port
> > blocking,
> > nor QoS is possible on their box.
> 
> QOS is not all that useful. It only works in the router for outgoing
> packets, and if you are sending lots of big packets upstream, e.g.
> filesharing, then you are going to have problems anyway. Latency is
> the killer of VoIP and it goes up quickly if your send connection is
> saturated.
>

By QoS I mean traffic shaping too.
 
> If you do use P2P throttle your total upload to about 1/30th bytes per
> second of your speed in bits per second, e.g. a 256k connection should
> be no more than 10k bytes per second, and may need to be less, try 7.5
> or 5 if you get too much jitter.
> 

I am not much of a file-sharer, so I don't know. my router does not know how 
to QoS, so I am not shaping anything at moment.

> Having no dialer as it were, means you are using MPLS, which some
> people have problems with. If it does cause problems, then it will be
> pretty obvious. People have complianed on this list that HOT only
> guarentees port 80 (HTTP), but I think they have since gotten better
> about it.
> 

not sure what you mean about port 80 - all ports are working fine. I had 
issues with a couple of ports a year ago (CVS was one, can't remember the 
other) - but it was related to Bezeq-int, and not HOT.

> If you have a router, are you sure it's not doing tunneling (the
> equivalent of a dialer) already? If it is using DHCP then you really
> are using MPLS and do not have any tunneling, if you are using an
> L2TP, PPTP, PPoE, etc connection you are.
> 

It's not dialing anything, just DHCP. I insist on this way of connection for 
the last 5 years, and it works flawlessly. Dialer is only trouble for me.

> > This is only based on what they told me, I will know more tomorrow,
> > and if
> > there is something to update, I will.
> 
> Update the list either way please. Someone will ask the same question
> again in a few months and at least they can find a response if they
> search the archives.
> 

It is working now, connected to my own router, as a client. it started 
working right after plugging in, without any port forwarding (not sure how - 
permanent connection to the base station?).
Then he forwarded UDP port 5060 to the box (I asked why if it worked before, 
he said just to be on the safe side. Everything still works without it 
though).
Then he wanted port 443 too - for managing the box from outside - but since 
I am using port 443 to my own machine, he gave up and asked to forward it if 
they ask me in support.

I nmap'ed the box, and it's only open port is 4567, which seems like an HTTP 
server listening, with htaccess protection. I don't know the user/pw for the 
box.
The box is an AudioCodes MP-202B 
(http://www.audiocodes.com/products/mediapack-20x).

--yuval
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/pipermail/linux-il/attachments/20100228/e04b60fe/attachment-0001.bin>