[AlexKidd]

The BG images that I saw show the 8320's WiFi setup screen which states "WiFi is useful for these things:" and then proceeds to talk about e-mailing. I want to know what else it will offer. For example, can I hook into my LAN and access web servers on various appliances around the house (Digital Music Players, etc.) and control them? Can it be used for faster internet browsing rather than using the dinky GPRS tower near my home?

So many questions - so few answers!

--Kidd

[FLIPP_96]

On TMO the main reason to have WiFi is UMA service aka TMO @Home.

[ryangoo]

Originally Posted by AlexKidd

The BG images that I saw show the 8320's WiFi setup screen which states "WiFi is useful for these things:" and then proceeds to talk about e-mailing. I want to know what else it will offer. For example, can I hook into my LAN and access web servers on various appliances around the house (Digital Music Players, etc.) and control them? Can it be used for faster internet browsing rather than using the dinky GPRS tower near my home?

So many questions - so few answers!

--Kidd

Although nothing is set in stone. . .

t-mo is developing a "t-mo @ home" service that uses the wifi network as a mini cell station. it would bring an instant service signal boost to people w/o very good coverage (assuming you have broadband, a wireless router, etc.)

As far as browsing I assume it has to be one of the main uses for WiFi. (unless its with cingular and they hinder it )

In order to connect to your various gadgets, software will def. need to be developed to do such things. Nothing like that is going to happen out of the box.

On a sort of side note, there was a program that i used a couple years back that pretty much let me use my old nokia 6230i to see my desktop and use the phone as a remote mouse via bluetooth. If that would be able to be implemented using wifi and the 8300 that would be sweet.

disclaimer: before i get flamed feel free to correct me and make any other points necessary sans the usual "you idiot" references. Im just saying what i think it'll be used for.

[AlexKidd]

UMA testing getting wrapped up and its all good - Engadget Mobile

Oh dang - that could be so unbelievably useful. I consume cellular minutes at a pretty good clip, and almost always from at home. (Customers don't like to be bothered learning two numbers!) If UMA lets me use my BlackBerry from home I could cut back on my minutes plan easily. I still hope it can do the other cool stuff like LAN browsing, etc.

--Kidd

[lark]

Originally Posted by FLIPP_96

On TMO the main reason to have WiFi is UMA service aka TMO @Home.

I even read the engadget link (posted on this thread), and am still not sure what UMA is.

Sigh.

In lousy cell areas the WiFi will let you get a better cell connection or you switch to WiFi calling?

[ryangoo]

check this site out. Gives the reg. joe version of what UMA does.

T-Mobile - Hot Spot @ Home

[lark]

ryangoo,
Thank you for the link. I think that looks pretty interesting. Depending on the price, it would be something I would probably get. It did not appear to me from the demo video that using TMo's router was required.

I actually am a VZW customer, using a smart phone, and trying to understand both the BB and other carriers before I switch.

Thanks again.

[Fungineer]

Originally Posted by lark

ryangoo,
Thank you for the link. I think that looks pretty interesting. Depending on the price, it would be something I would probably get. It did not appear to me from the demo video that using TMo's router was required.

I actually am a VZW customer, using a smart phone, and trying to understand both the BB and other carriers before I switch.

Thanks again.

Using TMo's router is not required, but likely it is recommended unless you want to set up your own traffic shaping algorithms / QOS etc. You can bet that every handset that TMo sells will be tested against their routers and theirs only, and if you choose not to use the one provided, then you can't complain if the voice quality sucks (which, without QOS in an environment with many additional MEs on the AP, it would).

Also, high-level description of UMA/GAN - your phone takes the GSM/GPRS stack that it would send over the cellular link and sends it over the WiFi link instead. The carrier's network sees your AP as just another base station.

[lark]

Originally Posted by Fungineer

. . . you can't complain if the voice quality sucks (which, without QOS in an environment with many additional MEs on the AP, it would).

Also, high-level description of UMA/GAN - your phone takes the GSM/GPRS stack that it would send over the cellular link and sends it over the WiFi link instead. The carrier's network sees your AP as just another base station.

I understood the first part, about using the TMo router. I have no idea, however, what the last sentences mean. My conclusion is that I should probably plan on using a TMo router.

What is a ME on the AP?

[AlexKidd]

Originally Posted by lark

I understood the first part, about using the TMo router. I have no idea, however, what the last sentences mean. My conclusion is that I should probably plan on using a TMo router.

What is a ME on the AP?

What he's really trying to say is that QoS (Quality of Service) support is very important on your broadband connection to ensure calls sound good and that the phone works reliably. If you're not a geek, then it's highly recommended to buy their router. If your single and are the only person on the AP and cable connection then you very well may be able to use the service with 100% quality without any QoS. Start a big file transfer from the 'net and your going to start getting choppy reception without QoS.

Technically speaking though if you do have a little knowledge then it's possible that the router you have now already handles QoS. Personally, I am fully knowledgable on various QoS technologies because all of my current home / home-office telephones are VoIP. I have set up multiple phone trunks to VoIP providers already and can easily set up another for T-Mobile. My home has a Cisco 806 broadband router with QoS, traffic shaping and I have a Cisco AP-350 802.11b wireless access point which itself also ensures QoS for wireless VoIP devices. (I have a ZyXEL Prestige 2000 VoIP phone which I bought to use around the house)

--Kidd

[lark]

Kidd,

Thanks for the response. I have a Linksys wireless router (b/g) in my house. Laptop and TiVo conncected to it. Probably I should get the TMo?

This is not yet available from TMo, correct?

[AlexKidd]

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8700/4.1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/100)

Originally Posted by lark

Kidd,

Thanks for the response. I have a Linksys wireless router (b/g) in my house. Laptop and TiVo conncected to it. Probably I should get the TMo?

This is not yet available from TMo, correct?

My understanding is that its only available in test markets. Something tells me that might be changing soon if the 8320 is going to be available early next month.

[rivviepop]

Just to pimp one of my favourite projects, DD-WRT has fullblown QoS availability within the firmware:

http://dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Quality_of_Service

Just one of your more advanced geeky options...as well as the project offering a specialize VOIP firmware as a choice as well:

http://dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Wha...#File_Versions

You don't need to spend a lot of cash to get something good, open source is everywhere.

[AlexKidd]

Originally Posted by rivviepop

What is DD-WRT? - WRT Wiki

You don't need to spend a lot of cash to get something good, open source is everywhere.

So, have they made it much easier to overwrite the firmware on current model routers? Used to be very difficult. I do remember hearing a lot of grumbling about one of the Linksys models people were using and they chopped the RAM in half killing the project. They later came out with an "L" version which put the RAM back in so people could run Linux on it.

This might be something to try, but only if you're really that strapped for cash.

--Kidd

[rivviepop]

Originally Posted by AlexKidd

So, have they made it much easier to overwrite the firmware on current model routers? Used to be very difficult. I do remember hearing a lot of grumbling about one of the Linksys models people were using and they chopped the RAM in half killing the project. They later came out with an "L" version which put the RAM back in so people could run Linux on it.

Works just fine -- the problem was that with v5 Linksys basically cut the RAM in half and used a bunch of different hardware (including boot ROM size capability), and switched to using a different RTOS kernel. It took the DD-WRT people some time, but it now works on those constrained devices as well.

The 'L' model is just the same as the v1 -> v4 models they used to produce, it contains the faster CPU, RAM, etc. as before. I have both a v3 and v4 at home, and run a cluster of newer L models here at the office in a WDS setup (works fantastically). In all cases the replacement of the firmware is dead simple, it just works; the v5+ models, though, are more painful from what I hear due to their hardware constraints. It's all in the Wiki...

This might be something to try, but only if you're really that strapped for cash.

It kinda goes well beyond that -- for ~$50 USD for the raw hardware, you get a device that can do all sorts of fantastic stuff; besides the QoS/VOIP we were talking about, you can run the VPN version to get back into your home network, hotspot setups for cafes with the Chilispot junk, or even just having fine tuned controls for MAC filtering and static DHCP (I use the static DHCP the most at home). While I don't need it, the ability to slightly tweek the Tx/Rx power to the antennaes is a popular use.

The list of features is huge, and it works great.
http://dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Wha...RT%3F#Features

[Fungineer]

Originally Posted by AlexKidd

What he's really trying to say is that QoS (Quality of Service) support is very important on your broadband connection to ensure calls sound good and that the phone works reliably. If you're not a geek, then it's highly recommended to buy their router. If your single and are the only person on the AP and cable connection then you very well may be able to use the service with 100% quality without any QoS. Start a big file transfer from the 'net and your going to start getting choppy reception without QoS.

Yeah, what he said.

Originally Posted by AlexKidd

Personally, I am fully knowledgable on various QoS technologies because all of my current home / home-office telephones are VoIP. I have set up multiple phone trunks to VoIP providers already and can easily set up another for T-Mobile.

UMA/GAN is not like SIP - you basically create a bridge from the handheld (btw: ME is "Mobile Equipment") to the UNC/GANC through an IPSec tunnel, and then route all your voice traffic over that - the network's UNC/GANC "looks" like any other base station on the cell network, so while this makes roaming from cell to WLAN much easier than using SIP or VCC, the amount of data you have to send over the WLAN is much higher than if you were just using G.711.
If you're doing the routing yourself, you will have to rely on the phone and UNC/GANC setting the correct TOS in the IPSec headers, or you will have to do priority based traffic shaping based on packet size (since the data packets are relatively small). You also probably want to drop the DTIM and broadcast intervals to save on power.

[AlexKidd]

Originally Posted by Fungineer

UMA/GAN is not like SIP - you basically create a bridge from the handheld (btw: ME is "Mobile Equipment") to the UNC/GANC through an IPSec tunnel, and then route all your voice traffic over that - the network's UNC/GANC "looks" like any other base station on the cell network, so while this makes roaming from cell to WLAN much easier than using SIP or VCC, the amount of data you have to send over the WLAN is much higher than if you were just using G.711.
If you're doing the routing yourself, you will have to rely on the phone and UNC/GANC setting the correct TOS in the IPSec headers, or you will have to do priority based traffic shaping based on packet size (since the data packets are relatively small). You also probably want to drop the DTIM and broadcast intervals to save on power.

Very interesting stuff. Currently I prioritize traffic by creating an access list which classifies the traffic. Usually I just tag any packets as going to a specific IP subnet as being of a certain Class of Service which is guaranteed traffic. As long as the packets are transmitted via IP to a specific subnet, I should be able to classify the packets regardless of size to get guaranteed bandwidth.

--Kidd