UKVoIPTalk.com

On 2006-09-18, jasee <jasee@btinternet.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> Dennis Ferguson wrote:[color=green]
>> On 2006-09-18, jasee <jasee@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> ethernet cable. Since you can't count on the MAC addresses generated
>> by user equipment being unique, making use of them would expose you
>> to difficulties which might better be avoided.
>>
>> I think the software which attempts to idenitify router makes and
>> models does so by searching for open service ports and IP level
>> packet formatting idiosyncrasies.[/color]
>
> Looking in the arp cache for my router reveals it is actually made by Askey
> Computer Corp. In fact, it's a bt voyager 2091. I'd be interested to know if
> other peoples voyager's *don't* show this (for the same model)
> I did mention other methods (it's been snipped).In earlier days if you
> simply telnetted (for instance) to some routers, they would announce what
> model they were. Packet capturing should also be useful.
> Mac addresses are still supposed to be unique AFAIK there is no way to
> permanently change them.[/color]

It is true that MAC addresses are supposed to be unique, but it is
hard to guarantee this on equipment you don't control. The problems
include

- equipment manufacturers make mistakes, or hardware breaks in a way
which makes the ROM the address is stored in unreadable

- the original (ancient history) intent was that each piece of
equipment would have a unique MAC address, but not necessarily
each interface in the box (Sun workstations come to mind as having
done it this way), so if you needed two interfaces in the same box
on the same wire (or same DSL network) they'd use the same MAC address

- a lot of equipment provides a way to configure any MAC address you
like on any interface, in part to provide you a way to work around
the problems above should you need to, and anything which can be
fiddled with by a user can't be guaranteed to be have any particular
properties at all

I can also tell you that right now my MacBook Pro is using a MAC address
which identifies it as a Cisco router, a change I could make "permanent"
if I could find the right startup configuration file to put the command
in. If I thought people were using MAC addresses to determine what type
of equipment I have for evil purposes I would do this on all the equipment
I own.

While we could quibble about this part, however, I think the original
point still stands: ADSL networks make no use of your router's MAC
address, and are point-to-point rather than shared. The MAC address may
not even be used on the DSL side of a router/modem combo like you have,
but even when it is the address is sent over an unshared, point-to-point
circuit that terminates at your service provider's router. I don't know
how anyone else could ever see it.

Dennis Ferguson

Chris Davies wrote:[color=blue]
> Bottom line: your ADSL modem/router's MAC address cannot be seen past
> the first router managed by your ISP.[/color]

In uk.telecom jasee <jasee@btinternet.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> Do you imagine you are the only one on 'your' side of the router?[/color]

This has now been answered well by others here. To qualify my own
comments, however, in the case of ADSL my answer to your question is
"yes".

Chris

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 18:25:59 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>A monthly fee for a service they provide every month, which uses their
>resources and therefore costs them something to provide.[/color]

No. I understand that a fixed IP costs nothing to provide, and in fact
can be slightly cheaper than a dynamic one.

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 08:54:52 +0100, "jasee" <jasee@btinternet.com>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>I thought this would be a good idea.[/color]

Why on earth did you think that? Moving to a good ADSL provider would
have been, but BT isn't one of them.

[email]hairydog@despammed.com[/email] wrote:[color=blue]
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 18:25:59 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> A monthly fee for a service they provide every month, which uses their
>> resources and therefore costs them something to provide.[/color]
>
> No. I understand that a fixed IP costs nothing to provide, and in fact
> can be slightly cheaper than a dynamic one.[/color]

Where do you understand this from? Are are you talking about public IP
addresses or private?

[email]hairydog@despammed.com[/email] wrote:[color=blue]
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 08:54:52 +0100, "jasee" <jasee@btinternet.com>
> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> I thought this would be a good idea.[/color]
>
> Why on earth did you think that? Moving to a good ADSL provider would
> have been, but BT isn't one of them.[/color]

I've been with them pretty well since they started offering ADSL, having had
ISDN before I can't say I've got any particular complaint now, they were
shakey to begin with.
The main reason for moving to 'business' (which you've snipped) is the lack
of a cap which is very useful if you are considering voip (for instance).
However I'm open to suggestions for other providers of uncapped services in
the TN27 area of Kent. (provided they've got a reasonable chance of
survival)

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 17:22:52 +0100, "jasee" <jasee@btinternet.com>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>The main reason for moving to 'business' (which you've snipped) is the lack
>of a cap which is very useful if you are considering voip (for instance).[/color]

VOIP is not going to bash many caps. At around 29 hours per gigabyte
(at worst - use a different codec and it's a lot less) the cost of the
calls will outweigh the data charges.
[color=blue]
>However I'm open to suggestions for other providers of uncapped services in
>the TN27 area of Kent. (provided they've got a reasonable chance of
>survival)[/color]

The chances are that most will be reselling BT Wholesale, just as BT
Broadband and BT Business Broadband are. Location makes no difference
to this.

And don't depend on BT staying in business for too long.

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 12:36:27 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>Where do you understand this from?[/color]

From ISPs.
[color=blue]
>Are are you talking about public IP
>addresses or private?[/color]

How could a private IP address cost more? They are all from set
ranges.