Something on your mind? Want to give us feedback on something in particular or everything in general? Tell us how we are doing!
#52239 by lacakid
Sat Apr 03, 2010 11:13 pm
So what's the deal on this? I would like to make an Asteix box for my home and use my ooma line as my main line... Any word from Ooma if they are "Ever" going to release this information?

Thanks much,
Thomas B.
#52282 by Davesworld
Mon Apr 05, 2010 2:37 am
Hard to say except this is a chronologically long thread going back to 2008. This was announced a while back but it's been awfully quiet since they pulled the iPhone sip app off the store a few months back. Their servers weren't ready at that time. Not sure exactly what Ooma IS working on right now. Lots of contests on Facebook though. :D
#52309 by southsound
Mon Apr 05, 2010 10:27 am
Davesworld wrote:Hard to say except this is a chronologically long thread going back to 2008. This was announced a while back but it's been awfully quiet since they pulled the iPhone sip app off the store a few months back. Their servers weren't ready at that time. Not sure exactly what Ooma IS working on right now. Lots of contests on Facebook though. :D

Maybe they could do a Facebook contest to win access to your own SIP credentials?? :P
#52420 by Bobby B
Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:07 pm
Yep, the iPhone App has been delayed - we're still targeting for a Q2 2010 release. The App is ready to go, but we've been delayed with working out some issues with deploying new PureVoice server infrastructure.

Davesworld wrote:Hard to say except this is a chronologically long thread going back to 2008. This was announced a while back but it's been awfully quiet since they pulled the iPhone sip app off the store a few months back. Their servers weren't ready at that time. Not sure exactly what Ooma IS working on right now. Lots of contests on Facebook though. :D
#52484 by flapjack
Wed Apr 07, 2010 10:54 am
Not to be cavalier... but why is everything about the iPhone? Are Windows Mobile devices more difficult to write to (Rhetorical question: I know the answer to this and it is not more difficult). Not to mention, why would Apple even sign off on this, being as though the ATT empire will lose money if people use an Ooma app over their call plan minutes.

Is this a marketing thing? Do you plan to sell this app and think Apple folks will pay for it more than WM6 users will? What about Blackberries?

<rant>This iPhone stuff is out of control. It does not do anything a WM phone did. They only marketed it better. WM has been cutting edge for so many years, seeing this kind of stuff go to the iPhone first makes me sick.</rant>
#52525 by Davesworld
Wed Apr 07, 2010 10:03 pm
The fairly large iPhone ownership and app store is really not a bad way to get Ooma noticed since their apps generally come from one source and iPhone users are conditioned to think you need an app for everything. Not sure if there would be any real reason to create a Symbian, Mimo or Android app or even (choke, cough cough) a WM app. Just the credentials will do nicely in my case.
#52555 by flapjack
Thu Apr 08, 2010 7:29 am
I agree, but with the ATT monster lurking, I wonder what the value in making the app would be. I know there has been some significant "back and forth" over the whole Google Voice vs Apple/ATT thing, but I haven't kept up to date. Last I heard, the court's said Apple couldn't block it and found that ATT and Apple had an "agreement" that prevent VOIP users from making calls over the ATT network. Need to do some reading and catch up.

My point is, Ooma could very well spend time/money developing an app, ony to have it shot down by Apple (on ATT's behalf), then spend millions fighting to have it "allowed". While all this crap goes on, there are REAL smart phones (you know... ones that support Flash and can multitask) who's users would love to see this pan out.

You're right with WM, though. It supports SIP without "an app for that". All we need are the credentials. I'm a basic Ooma user now, but would gladly pay the Premium fee if it were to allow me to have access to my SIP credentials. That is something worth paying for (are you reading this, Ooma?).
#73490 by thunderbird
Sun Jan 23, 2011 10:11 am
Information Only:

SIP Myths
On this page, we try to present some of the myths surrounding SIP and provide the real truth. We hope that this might help in your fairly judging the technology and deciding whether this is the right solution for you, either short-term or long-term.

1. SIP is an Emerging Protocol
The first drafts of SIP were developed in 1995 and first published for public review in February 1996! How long does it take for a technology to emerge? Planets emerge. Stars emerge. Should it take so long for a VoIP technology to emerge?

As of today, SIP is 14 years, 335 days old, counting from the date the first specification was published for public comment.

SIP is hardly new and it has been updated and revised for years. SIP is really quite an old protocol, yet people continue to apply the word "emerging" to the technology. Even after all of these years, the capabilities that SIP delivers are not fantastic. Other protocols have far exceeded SIP's capabilities and, while it might be correct to say that it is emerging, one has to question whether it is worth waiting for it to finally emerge. Even while new capabilities are slowly added to SIP, problems are constantly discovered that need to be addressed. As such, what limited benefits it might deliver are offset by interoperability problems.

2. SIP is Simple
This is false. Telephony, by its very nature, is not simple. In order to implement the most basic and practically useless call flow, sure it looks simple. However, if you want to actually create something useful, there is an inordinate amount of complexity involved. SIP was originally designed to simply make a "black phone" ring. From there, SIP was expanded and extended to allow for more general-purpose telephony. Further, it was discovered later that SIP over UDP was not a very workable solution, so TCP was recommended for most calls. To implement a basic SIP phone, one needs to support TCP and UDP, one needs to support most all of the features in RFC 3261 and many of the features from dozens of other RFCs. Further, because there are reliability issues with transmitting messages, the concept of reliable provisional responses was introduced and is necessary to ensure proper functionality. We could go on, but to say the least, SIP is hardly simple and is, in many respects, more complex than more capable video conferencing standards like H.323.

The charts at VoIP RFC Watch are useful.

3. SIP Can Do Many Things that Were Never Possible Before
There is nothing that SIP can do that other IP-based communication protocols cannot do. In fact, much of the functionality that SIP has been trying to deliver to the market for years was delivered by competitors like Skype in a very short time. Further, SIP is still very weak in terms of basic audio/visual communications, something at which H.323 excels. SIP has the potential to enable other forms of communication, of course, and instant messaging is one. But, it is important to note that H.323, Skype, or anything else can also deliver those same capabilities. So, where is SIP's advantage here? It does not have one.

4. SIP Will Enable All Kinds of New Applications
SIP or any other IP-based system could enable a host of new applications. The fact is, though, that most implementations suffer with basic interoperability issues. Further, how much work is it to add a simple application to a SIP phone? How much work is there in adding instant messaging support? How much work is there in adding electronic whiteboard functionality? This list can go on forever. It is actually quite difficult to extend SIP to add new functionality. Once you decide to add new functionality to SIP, you must update the entire SIP software application. By the very design of SIP, it is note easily extensible in terms of adding new functionality. Further, if you are an independent software vendor and you wish to add new functionality to another company's SIP product, it is a monumental task, if not an impossible one.

The problem is further complicated by the fact that SIP proxies, softswitches, session border controllers and other devices in the network would likely not support any new functionality without also being upgraded. By SIP's very design, it is not very easy to extend and enhance the protocol to supports new kinds of applications.

5. SIP Is Extensible, Whereas H.323 is Not
Both SIP and H.323 have defined mechanisms for extending the protocol in standard and non-standard ways. Unfortunately, the way in which one extends SIP using non-standard extensions is dangerous: there is a possibility of name collisions. H.323 is not subject to this problem, since each extension is associated with an OID or manufacturer code. As such, H.323 avoids name collisions by giving each manufacturer its own "name space" for extensions.


Copyright © 2011 • Packetizer, Inc.
#144118 by EricJRW
Wed Oct 10, 2018 4:09 pm
So I just learned about SIP. My phone (Motorola G5 Plus) apparently supports SIP, however, my carrier (Verizon) does not.


When I look in the SIP settings for the phone, it needs some credentials. I was kinda hoping I could use my Ooma credentials for making SIP, aka Wi-Fi, calls when I am travelling (abroad) and not on my cellular network. The last place I was, Ecuador, Verizon was not even a (roaming) option.


It would be advantageous to make a SIP call, and I was hoping maybe Ooma would be the key.

And now something just occurred to me. There is an Ooma app. How does it relate to SIP calls? And what charges, if any, are levied (local and international)?


One other thing, I suspect for SIP to be practical, there must be some sort hardware, in the various countries, where call are routed from the Internet to the land line (circuit) call. Correct?


Thanks, Eric

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests