Switched from Vonage and my troubles started

[barthold]

First of all, I want to say that the tech support is great. Very responsive and knowledgeable.

The rest of this email is about what I see as a fundamental flaw in the product that VOIPO offers. Namely the fact that, in order to get reliable inbound and outbond calls, ports 5004-65000 need to be available and forwarded to the ATA. In my case a Grandstream HT502.

This is just not a nice thing to do. One device on my LAN should not have to claim almost the full range of available ports. In my case, I cannot give the ATA all these ports. I have ports in use for other devices, several assigned through UPNP.

I will spare you the long and lengthy ways tech support and I are (still) trying to work around this. (If interested, I'll provide details). However, I am not getting answers to three basic questions from tech support, which I hope you guys can answer:

1) Is there a smaller range of ports that the HT502 really needs? So that I can forward a smaller range?
2) Failing that, is there a different ATA that voipo supports that doesn't have this issue?
3) Why is that I *never* had these issues with Vonage (was a customer for 5 years) on the exact same network setup? All I did was unplug the Vonage adapter and plugged in the Voipo provided one, and my troubles started :-(

I can totally see that someone not interested in trouble shooting, or technically capable, that will just give up when they run into the issue that half their calls only have one-way audio. I myself have spent hours and my wife is about ready to kill me. This is really frustrating I am really close of just switching back to Vonage. This aggrevation is not worth it. However, I would really like to have a solid and robust solution with Voipo.

Any suggestions? Thanks in advance for helping!

[GreenLantern]

I'm interested in the answer to this post. I too wonder how Vonage and others are able to provide service with a more limited number of ports.

I googled Vonage Ports and found this link. Looks like they use 10,000 to 20,000 range, plus a few select others.
https://support.vonage.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/690/kw/ports

[barthold]

I am happy to say that my service is working now, after a lot of experimentation and help from tech support (they are great). But read on.

Voipo still claims all ports 5004-65000 are needed. What I found works best for me is to put the HT502 on the DMZ port of my router. That enables you to turn back on the advanced firewall features, and you do not need to forward any ports anymore to the HT502. Voipo also said that they "moved" my HT502 to a different server, whatever that means exactly. I also turned off UPNP and am not using any ports in the range 5004-65000 currently. What I don't know is what will happen if some of my other devices will be using any port in the 5004-65000 range. I am planning on turning UPNP back on in a few days, see what happens once I get holes poked into that range of ports.

[Bink]

I’m curious to know what router you have—because I have an extremely restrictive symmetric NAT firewall (running OpenBSD) at home and VOIPo has been “plug and play” for me since day one. Zero ports have been forwarded. It Just Worked. No magical DMZ. That said though—yes, I concur—asking ports 5004-65000 to be forwarded to anything is beyond irrational.

[christcorp]

Let me explain something about ports. There are 65535 ports. However; that's for EACH IP address. Where conflicts arise is in the inbound, whereby you are trying to port forward. If you have a lot of devices that you are trying to work on your network; such as a server, camera, and other things, the easiest and best way to solve all your problems is to buy multiple static IP addresses. Then, ports don't matter. If each device has a different IP address, they can all use the same ports. But in the "Poor Man's" world of the internet, we use NAT. We take 1 IP address, a router, and try and get a lot of things working on it.

The other thing is; VoipO doesn't use all the ports between 5004-65000. But their ports are dynamic, so you don't quite which ports are going to be used for the voice packets until it happens. Personally, where most problems come from with Voip and Ports, are people who insist on using the Firewall features of their router; and Static Packet Inspection. (SPI). I recommend leaving them totally OFF. If you are really insistent on using them instead of individual software solutions, simply use 2 separate routers. I.e. Have 1 typical router with built in 4 port switch. Hook that to your internet modem. One LAN port connect to your VOIP adapter. The 2nd port, connect to a 2nd router. In that router, you can do all the firewalling, SPI, Port Forwarding, etc... that you want. On the first router, forward a Port RANGE of 5004-65000 to the voip adapter. Ports 1-5003 and 65001-65535 forward to the 2nd Ip address that's feeding the 2nd router. Then, in the 2nd router, port forward the individual ports to the devices you have using it.

I personally prefer to protect my individual devices instead of having one router try and protect the entire network. But I have used multiple routers before. If you know how to route properly, you can definitely do it. Think about all the routers you have to go through in order to get to a server on the internet. Probably no less than 4-5. Anyway; just a suggestion.

[Bink]

If you are really insistent on using them instead of individual software solutions, simply use 2 separate routers. I.e. Have 1 typical router with built in 4 port switch. Hook that to your internet modem. One LAN port connect to your VOIP adapter. The 2nd port, connect to a 2nd router. In that router, you can do all the firewalling, SPI, Port Forwarding, etc... that you want. On the first router, forward a Port RANGE of 5004-65000 to the voip adapter. Ports 1-5003 and 65001-65535 forward to the 2nd Ip address that's feeding the 2nd router. Then, in the 2nd router, port forward the individual ports to the devices you have using it.
While I concur with you with regard to the sad state of affairs with consumer-class Internet, single IP addresses and NAT—hopefully IPv6 addresses this—and while VOIPo’s issues might be addressed by taking a draconian approach with port forwarding, to assume your single service/application is entitled to 90 percent of someone’s available ports is unreasonable. As for using multiple routers, IMHO, this is overly complex and should not be required to simply have voice service.

[GreenLantern]

It seems like voipo should be able to narrow the range of RTP ports on a per user basis.

Or even better, configure the switch (FreeSwitch I believe) to assign a very specific set of RTP ports for each user/account.

This would require a bit more initial setup on accounts, but in the long run I would expect it to pay off.

[barthold]

To Bink: I have a netgear WNDR3700 router.

To Christcorp: While what you suggest will work, that kind of install makes Voipo instantly a niche service. If it is not "plug and play" it won't be widely adopted. BTW I did try something like what you said with the HT502 in front of my router. But that made my incoming connections no longer work, plus the HT502 has a throughput limit of about 20 Mbps and my internet connection is (a lot) faster than that. Thus I was losing bandwidth. Your comment about ports is interesting. If I understand you right, now that the ATA is on the DMZ port, I can now use the same ports the ATA might use, correct?

[Tooth]

To Bink: I have a netgear WNDR3700 router.

To Christcorp: While what you suggest will work, that kind of install makes Voipo instantly a niche service. If it is not "plug and play" it won't be widely adopted. BTW I did try something like what you said with the HT502 in front of my router. But that made my incoming connections no longer work, plus the HT502 has a throughput limit of about 20 Mbps and my internet connection is (a lot) faster than that. Thus I was losing bandwidth. Your comment about ports is interesting. If I understand you right, now that the ATA is on the DMZ port, I can now use the same ports the ATA might use, correct?

I looked through the HT502 user manual and I didn't see anything about the throughput maximum being 20 Mbs. Is that figure based on your experience?

[Bink]

I looked through the HT502 user manual and I didn't see anything about the throughput maximum being 20 Mbs. Is that figure based on your experience?
While I haven’t formally tested it, one of my devices downloaded at 11Mbps through it (my Internet connection is 20Mbps). If this is the upper limit of the device (don’t know if this is an artificial ceiling configured by VOIPo), then it is substandard for many Internet connections. Thankfully, only one of my systems communicates through this device—if my whole network had to, this would be unacceptable. That said, assuming the limit is not artificial, I understand this device supports a bridging mode—no NATting—and I wonder if this mode would allow for better performance. As it stands, it appears the VOIPo recommended physical configuration of the device would negatively affect my Internet speeds. Fortunately, I do not use this device in the recommended physical configuration and my VoIP works well.

[christcorp]

Voipo went with the voip adapter/router combo to make the "Plug and Play" capability easier for customers. And overall; that works perfectly fine. That allows it to be widely accepted.

Now; just like with any other network/internet service/configuration; you can make it any way you want to. The overwhelming majority of internet users have no need, desire, etc... to increase their bandwidth, talk QOS, port forward, etc... If I died 5 years ago, my wife would have still been using 1.5mb/896kb DSL with one wired computer and a wireless router for the laptop. But things evolve. As for being "Widely Accepted" the majority of people don't evolve. They couldn't care less. The fact that you are even using/discussing voip puts you into a totally different category compared to the majority of the country. The majority of the country uses POTS or ONLY Cell phones. And in time; even Voip may disappear in the shadow of Cellular/4G/LTE technology.

But currently, there are 3 types of people who use voip. 1) Those who don't know they're using it; via their cable or wireless broadband provider. (They call it Digital Phone). 2) Those who bought Vonage or MagicJack because they saw it on TV. 3) Those like many of us, who are geeks and actually researched a little bit of this. Some started with vonage or digital phone and progressed to better voip.

So people like me, and some of you, who have 30mb/5mb or similar, needs self educate yourself when it comes to wanting voip. Voip is another application for your computer/home network. Do I use a voip adapter/router ahead of my regular network router for plug and play? No way. BUT, if I want it better, then that's my responsibility to learn some basic networking. If I want to use my gigabit "n" routers and bonded Cable internet; that's my responsibility. But VoipO's basic configuration; if done accordingly; will allow you voip phone service and simultaneous internet connection. And for 90+% of customers, that's perfectly fine. But for the less than 10% of customers who know the difference between 10 and 20mb bandwidth; who visit these types of forums; etc... they/you/we need to be able to reconfigure out network, and be responsible for it, to work with both voip and our more specific bandwidth/network needs. That is not Voipo or your internet provider's responsibility.

Then again; that's what "FORUMS" are for. The provider gives you the basic working connection. Come to the forums; ask questions; learn; and you'll be able to make your network work anyway you want it to. I have 30+mb/5mb internet service. I have 3 voip adapters connected. I don't slow down in ANY internet activities. And my voip adapters are behind my routers. Just like they were another PC. For the basic (Majority) customer, the voipo equipment works perfectly. For the niche crowd, you need to be more involved and responsible yourself. I.e. It's not up to Ford or GM to help me "TWEEK" my Mustang or Corvette because I want to do "OTHER" things with it compared to simply just driving it. If I want to tweek and have fun, then I guess I need to learn a few things..... Or pay someone who knows how to do it. NOT Ford or GM.

[Tooth]

Voipo went with the voip adapter/router combo to make the "Plug and Play" capability easier for customers. And overall; that works perfectly fine. That allows it to be widely accepted.

Now; just like with any other network/internet service/configuration; you can make it any way you want to. The overwhelming majority of internet users have no need, desire, etc... to increase their bandwidth, talk QOS, port forward, etc... If I died 5 years ago, my wife would have still been using 1.5mb/896kb DSL with one wired computer and a wireless router for the laptop. But things evolve. As for being "Widely Accepted" the majority of people don't evolve. They couldn't care less. The fact that you are even using/discussing voip puts you into a totally different category compared to the majority of the country. The majority of the country uses POTS or ONLY Cell phones. And in time; even Voip may disappear in the shadow of Cellular/4G/LTE technology.

But currently, there are 3 types of people who use voip. 1) Those who don't know they're using it; via their cable or wireless broadband provider. (They call it Digital Phone). 2) Those who bought Vonage or MagicJack because they saw it on TV. 3) Those like many of us, who are geeks and actually researched a little bit of this. Some started with vonage or digital phone and progressed to better voip.

So people like me, and some of you, who have 30mb/5mb or similar, needs self educate yourself when it comes to wanting voip. Voip is another application for your computer/home network. Do I use a voip adapter/router ahead of my regular network router for plug and play? No way. BUT, if I want it better, then that's my responsibility to learn some basic networking. If I want to use my gigabit "n" routers and bonded Cable internet; that's my responsibility. But VoipO's basic configuration; if done accordingly; will allow you voip phone service and simultaneous internet connection. And for 90+% of customers, that's perfectly fine. But for the less than 10% of customers who know the difference between 10 and 20mb bandwidth; who visit these types of forums; etc... they/you/we need to be able to reconfigure out network, and be responsible for it, to work with both voip and our more specific bandwidth/network needs. That is not Voipo or your internet provider's responsibility.

Then again; that's what "FORUMS" are for. The provider gives you the basic working connection. Come to the forums; ask questions; learn; and you'll be able to make your network work anyway you want it to. I have 30+mb/5mb internet service. I have 3 voip adapters connected. I don't slow down in ANY internet activities. And my voip adapters are behind my routers. Just like they were another PC. For the basic (Majority) customer, the voipo equipment works perfectly. For the niche crowd, you need to be more involved and responsible yourself. I.e. It's not up to Ford or GM to help me "TWEEK" my Mustang or Corvette because I want to do "OTHER" things with it compared to simply just driving it. If I want to tweek and have fun, then I guess I need to learn a few things..... Or pay someone who knows how to do it. NOT Ford or GM.

So I guess what all that means is that you've set a static IP address on your VoIPo ATA and set your router to forward that huge port range to the ATA because you didn't want the HT502's routing capabilities (or lack thereof) to slow down your network.

[christcorp]

So I guess what all that means is that you've set a static IP address on your VoIPo ATA and set your router to forward that huge port range to the ATA because you didn't want the HT502's routing capabilities (or lack thereof) to slow down your network.

Not completely true. 1) I've had voip for a very long time. 2) I am using a PAP2 voip adapter, because that's what I was issued by VoipO. (No integrated router). 3) I have over 30+ years of networking experience/degrees/etc... in the computer/telecommunication world. It's what I do for a living. I even manage a complete telephone system with thousands of lines. In other words, I have the capability and knowledge to make my network exactly the way I want it to work.

My point was that for the 99% of normal computer/internet users, who want to get voip, and integrated voip adapter/router is the best solution for getting voip and internet. If you are more knowledgeable about the internet; which most people who come to a forum are; then there are a number of ways to use the HT502 without affecting your internet speeds. Again; I'm talking about the "Minority". As a business, voipo has to look at the mass demographic of their customers. But for the more knowledgeable, there are plenty of ways to make your network work. But you have to be willing to do a few things and be willing to learn.

The problem is: For the vast majority of customers, true plug and play works fine. No problems. For the very knowledgeable, plug and play isn't a consideration, because we have pretty extensive networks, and we're going to customize it with static IP addresses, separate routers, switches, wireless access points, firewalls, etc... The problem is with the middle group that has the basic home network with the traditional linksys/belkin/dlink type of combo wireless router/switch; who want the Plug and Play capability that the majority customer has, but with the extra capabilities that a person with a lot of networking experience has.

This is not to say you need to buy a bunch of hardware. There's plenty of ways to set up the traditional home network to give your computers full bandwidth and still have the HT502 give you good voip service. It also depends if you are running a network that provides server capabilities and has outbound traffic where ports are an issue. I.e. if you don't have an email server, web server, IP cam, or something else where an external source is trying to connect to you, then ports aren't important at all. You could DMZ the voip adapter and not even worry about ports. There are some concerns, but those are easy to address. Bottom line; the vast majority of internet users aren't worried about ports, bandwidth, qos, etc... And for them, the company and their products are perfect. For the others, that's what "FORUMS" are for. To learn how to do the unique things you want to do.

[barthold]

I looked through the HT502 user manual and I didn't see anything about the throughput maximum being 20 Mbs. Is that figure based on your experience?

Yes, I measured this using speedtest.net. I get 30-35 Mbps down without the HT502. With the HT502 in front of my router, it capped at around 20. This was in NAT mode, I did not try the bridge mode of the HT502.

[barthold]

Voipo went with the voip adapter/router combo to make the "Plug and Play" capability easier for customers. And overall; that works perfectly fine. That allows it to be widely accepted.


Fact is that Vonage, with my sophisticated and evolving network setup was just plug and play. It worked for 5+ years without me doing anything at all network wise for my Vonage adapter. Plus it was super reliable. When I switched to voipo, it wasn't plug and play, and definitely not reliable, until a long email conversation with tech support. Maybe I am the unlucky exception, but I think voipo can learn something from this. That is the whole point why I started this thread.

[christcorp]

Well, if you've got a sophisticated network, then there's really no reason for you to have a voip adapter, with a built in router, in front of your router. I don't have a $400 router so I can put a cheap router in front of it. Not saying you have to have expensive equipment. You don't. But no two voip providers are identical. And there's no doubt that a certain combination of voip provider; internet provider; and home network works better than a different combination. And while you seemed to have had great success with Vonage, I've read plenty of reviews by customers who haven't had as good of luck using vonage.

I would definitely put the HT502 in bridge mode if you're going to use it ahead of your network router. (Just to get rid of the double-NAT). Even then, I'm not sure if you can get your bandwidth back. The HT502 specs says it has a 10mb/100mb ethernet port on it. But my experience is that it works at or defaults at 10mb. That could definitely stop your bandwidth. But you do have a lot of other options. It sounds like you know enough about networks, put the adapter behind your router and just use it for voip. If you do port range forwarding, you can set up all the ports you need in your network in less than 15 minutes.

[Bink]

The HT502 specs says it has a 10mb/100mb ethernet port on it. But my experience is that it works at or defaults at 10mb.
FWIW, this negotiated with my GigE switch at 100Mbps (but the device doesn’t appear to be capable of anything near that).

[tritch]

I would definitely put the HT502 in bridge mode if you're going to use it ahead of your network router. (Just to get rid of the double-NAT). Even then, I'm not sure if you can get your bandwidth back. The HT502 specs says it has a 10mb/100mb ethernet port on it. But my experience is that it works at or defaults at 10mb. That could definitely stop your bandwidth. But you do have a lot of other options. It sounds like you know enough about networks, put the adapter behind your router and just use it for voip. If you do port range forwarding, you can set up all the ports you need in your network in less than 15 minutes.

christcorp makes some good points.....

Some ATA's with built-in routers are known for choking speeds with the router function enabled, most notably the Linksys SPA2102 which chokes around 7.5 Mbs. ATA's are engineered towards their primary function of voip not as a router. Unfortunately, this leaves a dilemma for those who have extremely fast speeds from their ISP. Do I put the ATA in front or behind the router? You ultimately will have to make your own choice between reliability and speed based on your network expertise. There's nothing Voipo can do about the engineering /software limits of the ATA.

Putting the ATA in front of the router and bridging it will likely eliminate the speed bottleneck, but there are some caveats. Here are 4 options to think about…..

Option 1: Modem (bridged) -> ATA (bridged) -> Router (DHCP enabled)
This is an ideal option, but most users don't have this ability. ISP’s generally allow only 1 public IP address to your account. In this case, the ATA will pull the public IP address to itself and will leave no IP address for your router to pull. This will leave you with no Internet for those devices connected to your router. If your ISP allows you to pull 2 public IP addresses, then both your ATA and router will be able pull its own IP's and things will work beautifully. There’s no NAT to the ATA and no port forwarding needed to the ATA. The router and ATA basically work independently of each other and can be configured separately. This is my current setup and it works great. (CenturyLink provides me 2 public DHCP addresses for free)

Option 2: Modem (unbridged w/ built-in router) -> ATA (bridged) -> Router (DHCP disabled)
In this example, the modem pulls the public IP from your ISP and provides a single NAT for your ATA and those devices attached to the router. I’m assuming the modem’s built-in router can provide an adequate number of private IP’s from its DHCP pool. You'll still need to forward ports to the ATA within the modem’s built-in router. I don’t particularly care for this option because the modem’s built-in router probably lacks the configuration ability of a full-fledged router.

Option 3: Modem (unbridged w/ built-in router) -> ATA (bridged) -> Router (DHCP enabled)
This option is for those who don’t mind double NAT’ing your network. This gives you more flexibility to control the devices behind your router.

Option 4: Modem (unbridged w/ built-in router) -> ATA (unbridged) -> Router (DHCP enabled)
The least desirable......what's surprising is how many people are unknowingly triple NAT'ing their attached router devices with this type of configuration.

If you must put the ATA behind the router, it's always a good idea to bridge the modem to avoid double NAT. Just let the router handle everything. Cable modems are usually bridged already but DSL modems are usually not, then forward the ports to the ATA.