[lohphat]

I make a UMA call via wifi and broadband and call drops within 5 seconds. Wifi 802.11g sitting next to the base station. DSL performance is 1Mb/s down and 256 Mb/s up.

Call test: getting voicemail

Ping to UMA Security Gateway IP (208.54.3.1) = 173ms

Traceroute:

tracert 208.54.3.1

Tracing route to m010336d0.tmodns.net [208.54.3.1]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
2 16 ms 14 ms 14 ms host-92-12-96-1.as43234.net [92.12.96.1]
3 13 ms 15 ms 14 ms 92.31.253.16
4 14 ms 14 ms 14 ms xe-11-2-0-scr001.log.as13285.net [78.144.2.3]
5 14 ms 15 ms 14 ms Opal-ge-2/2/0.mpr1.lhr3.above.net [213.161.78.21
3]
6 259 ms 254 ms * so-0-1-0.mpr2.dca2.us.above.net [64.125.27.165]

7 89 ms 89 ms 90 ms so-5-0-0.mpr2.iad1.us.above.net [64.125.27.209]

8 118 ms 91 ms 89 ms so-3-0-0.mpr1.iad2.us.above.net [64.125.29.134]

9 89 ms 89 ms 89 ms so-3-0-0.mpr1.iad10.us.above.net [64.125.30.117]

10 89 ms 90 ms 90 ms above-oc48.iad.att.net [64.125.13.14]
11 172 ms 175 ms 172 ms tbr1.wswdc.ip.att.net [12.122.80.46]
12 172 ms 172 ms 172 ms cr1.wswdc.ip.att.net [12.122.16.9]
13 172 ms 172 ms 173 ms cr2.phlpa.ip.att.net [12.122.4.53]
14 172 ms 174 ms 172 ms cr2.cl2oh.ip.att.net [12.122.2.209]
15 173 ms 174 ms 172 ms cr1.cl2oh.ip.att.net [12.122.2.125]
16 172 ms 174 ms 174 ms cr1.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.2.205]
17 172 ms 172 ms 172 ms cr1.st6wa.ip.att.net [12.122.31.162]
18 173 ms 174 ms 173 ms tbr1.st6wa.ip.att.net [12.122.23.146]
19 171 ms 171 ms 172 ms 12.127.6.33
20 174 ms 171 ms 172 ms 12.124.173.14
21 172 ms 172 ms 172 ms m010336d0.tmodns.net [208.54.3.1]

Trace complete.

Until T-mobile can get a UMA gateway in Europe this is a marketing fiasco.

I thought this was caused by the broadband provider is AOL via BT and PPPoe auth but when I ping local UK websites, they don't go through the US:

ping BBC - bbc.co.uk homepage - Home of the BBC on the Internet

Pinging BBC - bbc.co.uk homepage - Home of the BBC on the Internet [212.58.251.206] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.251.206: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=246
Reply from 212.58.251.206: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=246
Reply from 212.58.251.206: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=246
Reply from 212.58.251.206: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=246

Ping statistics for 212.58.251.206:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 17ms, Maximum = 18ms, Average = 17ms

tracert BBC - bbc.co.uk homepage - Home of the BBC on the Internet

Tracing route to BBC - bbc.co.uk homepage - Home of the BBC on the Internet [212.58.253.74]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
2 15 ms 14 ms 14 ms host-92-12-96-1.as43234.net [92.12.96.1]
3 14 ms 14 ms 13 ms 92.31.252.16
4 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms xe-10-2-0-scr002.log.as13285.net [78.144.2.129]

5 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms xe-11-0-0-scr010.thn.as13285.net [78.144.1.0]
6 16 ms 41 ms 85 ms bbc-gw0-linx.prt0.thdoe.bbc.co.uk [195.66.224.10
3]
7 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms 212.58.238.129
8 16 ms 18 ms 17 ms 212.58.239.222
9 17 ms 18 ms 17 ms www5.cwwtf.bbc.co.uk [212.58.253.74]

Trace complete.

UMA is an incomplete, unreliable "solution".

[TroyDBrown]

Until users figure out how UMA works, router settings etc we will always have these posts. I wouldn't write off UMA for internatrional use. You wil notice many of us on here use it with no issue internationally. Did you check any router configuration? Or was it a random HotSpot? Are you using BlueTooth when making these calls? There is a lot to look at. A lot more than a basic TraceRoute. I am by no means saying UMA is flawless. I think this is more of a rant then a question.

[John Clark]

It's a toss-up between the Wifi Hotzone and the Rants N Raves forum. Moved to the Wifi Forum for now.

I've heard good things from those using UMA for calls when travelling internationally. 1Mb down and 256mb up is not much of a connection, really. If others are on the system then your bandwidth is being taken up by others. I have this happen in hotels in the US. I notice it with my laptop in slow web surfing and on my BB in poor call quality. If the network isn't setup for WMM, QoS, etc. then you will have this problem occasionally.

I agree with Troy. I wouldn't "write-off" UMA just yet.

[lohphat]

Originally Posted by troydbrown

Until users figure out how UMA works, router settings etc we will always have these posts. I wouldn't write off UMA for internatrional use. You wil notice many of us on here use it with no issue internationally. Did you check any router configuration? Or was it a random HotSpot? Are you using BlueTooth when making these calls? There is a lot to look at. A lot more than a basic TraceRoute. I am by no means saying UMA is flawless. I think this is more of a rant then a question.

If a user has to be aware of infrastructure details, then the solution is too fragile. it should "just work", period. Imagine deploying UMA to a non-technical sales organization. You'd better prepare for a career change.

No, I wasn't using Bluetooth, it was an 802.11g connection will full bars to a Netgear DG834PN router over a wpa2 connection.

[sgtcasey]

Originally Posted by lohphat

If a user has to be aware of infrastructure details, then the solution is too fragile. it should "just work", period. Imagine deploying UMA to a non-technical sales organization. You'd better prepare for a career change.

No, I wasn't using Bluetooth, it was an 802.11g connection will full bars to a Netgear DG834PN router over a wpa2 connection.[/QUOTE]

What type of QoS settings were on the router? How many other users were using that router? Anyone file sharing or downloading? Any other wireless devices around you? Dropping a call within a few seconds of originating the call sounds a lot like a network/router issue to me.

For UMA calling the user certainly does need to be aware of where or what they are connecting to via wi-fi if it isn't working. T-Mobile cannot guarantee that UMA will work everywhere or with every router or wireless network you might come across. Router configurations and such out of the control of T-Mobile is why.

Knowing the equipment you are trying to use will greatly increase the chance you will be able to successfully use UMA. It will also greatly decrease the frustration when it doesn't work.

Dave

[lohphat]

What type of QoS settings were on the router? How many other users were using that router? Anyone file sharing or downloading? Any other wireless devices around you? Dropping a call within a few seconds of originating the call sounds a lot like a network/router issue to me.

For UMA calling the user certainly does need to be aware of where or what they are connecting to via wi-fi if it isn't working. T-Mobile cannot guarantee that UMA will work everywhere or with every router or wireless network you might come across. Router configurations and such out of the control of T-Mobile is why.

I was the only person on the router. It's the only AP in the area. DSL speed test shows a solid 1Mb/s down and 200Kb/s up channel.

I've used UMA in a busy t-mobile hot-spot with better results.

I'm not expecting perfection, just basic usability.

[John Clark]

With 200kb upstream I wouldn't expect much. There are many things that affect this just as Dave said above. UMA isn't perfect but it works for me most of the time.

[sgtcasey]

The ultimate test is to try it at another location, using another ISP, and another router. If it works good there but not at the original location you've narrowed down the problem.

Dave

[lohphat]

200 Kb/s upstream is irrelevant since I'm just listening to voicemail. The downstream bandwidth is more important.

[TroyDBrown]

You still need upstream. Its stll sending background noise.

[John Clark]

Yep...that's not a real optimum network for UMA.

[TroyDBrown]

Originally Posted by lohphat

If a user has to be aware of infrastructure details, then the solution is too fragile. it should "just work", period. Imagine deploying UMA to a non-technical sales organization. You'd better prepare for a career change.

No, I wasn't using Bluetooth, it was an 802.11g connection will full bars to a Netgear DG834PN router over a wpa2 connection.

Computers should "just work" as well but they don't. UMA is an add on feature and I do have clients that have rolled it out in their offices without issue. If you are using some random access point yes you can have issues and T-Mobiles disclosure on the FAQ even states that. UMA is no different that VoIP which can have port and firewall issue. The only fix to the issue would be to get every Access Point / Router manufacturer to agree on a standard configuration and not allow users to change it. We know that won't happen.

You may want to look into Pre-Paid SIM cards for travels. That is what I use to do but UMA works very well for me in my travels. The technology is new and I am an early adopter willing to deal with the issues as the technology grows.

[John Clark]

[Soapm]

I suspect as time goes on QoS for VoIP or UMA will become more common but until then, if the voice packets don't have priority then you will have problems. I work for a telecom company and we are discovering this more each day, unless you commit XX amount of bandwidth exclusively for voice you will have problems with VoIP.

Edited to ADD... We notice a significant improvement of quality and reliability when VoIP is used over a PIP or Frame. I think there is just too much junk on the internet and I'm not sure if the backbone routers are giving priority to voice packets YET. I know they will someday.

[phrider]

Originally Posted by troydbrown

You may want to look into Pre-Paid SIM cards for travels.

This is an especially good alternative in London.

Go to Carphone Warehouse and get a Fresh World / Mobile World Sim. Calls to US are 5p per minute (10 US cents per minute) if I recall correctly. And if someone calls you, it's free (to you). Calls to the UK are 15p (30 US cents per minute).

See Buy Mobile phones - Carphone Warehouse UK
or Buy Mobile phones - Carphone Warehouse UK
or just Carphone Warehouse

[John Clark]

Originally Posted by Soapm

I suspect as time goes on QoS for VoIP or UMA will become more common but until then, if the voice packets don't have priority then you will have problems. I work for a telecom company and we are discovering this more each day, unless you commit XX amount of bandwidth exclusively for voice you will have problems with VoIP.

Edited to ADD... We notice a significant improvement of quality and reliability when VoIP is used over a PIP or Frame. I think there is just too much junk on the internet and I'm not sure if the backbone routers are giving priority to voice packets YET. I know they will someday.

I'm sure this is the issue. Wanting VoIP with mobile devices is fairly new and when they setup a router somewhere they aren't enabling QoS or WMM. It's just setup for standard laptop access. It will take a while for most systems to be setup that way.

[phrider]

Back in the dark ages of VoIP in 2000-2001, when Sprint was offering their bleeding edge (and it bled to death) version of 1MB/8MB DSL with 2 IPs and 4 fully featured VoIP phone lines, they started switching the voice to VoATM.

It was great at $159/month for the 1MB/8MB DSL and 4 voice lines and 1000 min of LD per month (and real directory listings and 911 service, not E911), but it didn't last. Finally, service offerings are just starting to reach this price level again this year.

[Soapm]

Originally Posted by phrider

Back in the dark ages of VoIP in 2000-2001, when Sprint was offering their bleeding edge (and it bled to death) version of 1MB/8MB DSL with 2 IPs and 4 fully featured VoIP phone lines, they started switching the voice to VoATM.

It was great at $159/month for the 1MB/8MB DSL and 4 voice lines and 1000 min of LD per month (and real directory listings and 911 service, not E911), but it didn't last. Finally, service offerings are just starting to reach this price level again this year.

Was this a business plan? Did Sprint have fiber in that area? I didn't know copper wire DSL would hit those speeds but I could be wrong.

[phrider]

Originally Posted by Soapm

Was this a business plan? Did Sprint have fiber in that area? I didn't know copper wire DSL would hit those speeds but I could be wrong.

It was residential, but I was able to get a Pacific Bell business number ported to it (directory listing and all), then ported the number back when Sprint abandonned the business.

It was on a Pac Bell dry line copper circuit. Pac Bell installers "accidentally" interrupted it about every 6 weeks.

Yes, if you're close enough to the local switch, the real top rate on DSL ("full rate DSL") has always been 8 Mb down and 1 Mb up. It got close to that at my 4000 foot location, too. For historical interest, go to Sprint ION forum - dslreports.com broadband community

[monkeypaw]

Originally Posted by lohphat

If a user has to be aware of infrastructure details, then the solution is too fragile. it should "just work", period. Imagine deploying UMA to a non-technical sales organization. You'd better prepare for a career change.

No, I wasn't using Bluetooth, it was an 802.11g connection will full bars to a Netgear DG834PN router over a wpa2 connection.

Tmobile doesn't market UMA as an international solution. They at best say it may not work.

That model router is a RangeMax which gives 10 times the speed and 10 times the coverage of a regular router. Not sure what that means technically but N compatible routers and other non-vanilla routers seem to be troublesome with UMA.

The website says that model is "not available in North America." There's some specs on it that I don't think are used in the US.

DG834PN - RangeMaxâ„¢ Wireless Modem Router - NETGEAR.com

I think finding a different router would give a better chance of connecting.