VoIP for Deployed Soldiers? 362
rickbassham asks: "With VoIP really catching on these days, I decided to look into it for keeping deployed soldiers in touch with family and friends. I am currently a soldier in Iraq, and have the ability to get satellite-based internet, thanks to a few of the locals. While individually it is prohibitively expensive, a group of soldiers can come together to purchase a decent-to-high-speed internet connection. One of my plans is to link other soldiers to Vonage or another VoIP provider, so they will be able to keep in touch. Understanding the latency issues with VoIP via satellite (not to mention the other disadvantages), what upload speed does Slashdot recommend as a minimum for a QoS enabled connection for about 15-20 soldiers? The same for a non-QoS connection? What recommendations do you have for a good VoIP provider?"
Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:5, Interesting)
I would like to know if I was experiencing something that is unusual for military personnel deployed overseas? I mean this guy makes it seem as if he's hanging on to a rope thrown to him by the locals. From what I understand from the one guy I know that just returned from Iraq the locals over there want absolutely NOTHING to do w/the military personnel stationed in the desert.
I also know that phone calls were routinely made to his family and to another buddy that is stationed in the States. Why would they need VoIP and why would they need to do it via satellite connection?
As this guy said, sat-based Internet SUCK HARD for VoIP being that it is so latent. That wouldn't exactly make for real-time conversations regardless of how clear the voice might be... I have run the testers that other slashdotters have linked to before (sorry don't have it on-hand right now) and my 256k upstream seems to rate just fine. I haven't actually used VoIP though so I really couldn't tell you and I certainly couldn't recommend something to handle 15-20 people simulatanously (if that's what you mean).
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Informative)
"Also, in WWII at least; letters to home were free, no stamp."
still the case today, they just write "free mail" in the top corner where a stamp would be.Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't give these soldiers too much credit for being security-minded, most of them are 18 year old kids, fresh out of high school and straight out of the boot camp. The internet is one of the best and worst things for soldiers to have access to. I'd hate to be a military sysadmin.
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do you find it relevant to point out that the abused detainees were alleged violent rioters? Was it proven in a court of law that they were violent rioters? Would that justify the abuse they suffered?
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Prisoners of war are to be treated as such, as agreed to in the Geneva Convention. Prisoners of war are enemy combatants that often have simply had the poor luck of being born in another country. Even regular prisoner should be treated fa
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Informative)
> locals over there want absolutely NOTHING to do w/the military personnel
> stationed in the desert
Depends on where in Iraq you are. Iraq is a very divided country; in some spots, you're quite safe as a soldier (even an American soldier, although being a foreign soldier is better). In others, even leaving your base in an armored vehicle is risking your life. It all depends. But in general, yes, most Iraqis accordin
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't an American soldier a foreign soldier in Iraq?
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Insightful)
I do often find it amusing hearing American officials talking about how there have been hordes of foreign fighters infiltrating Iraq and creating conflict. Or more recently, hearing American officials condemning Syria for occupying another country (Lebanon) without the people's support.
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:2)
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:2)
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Really? I'm surprised that it isn't higher. I mean, suppose France invaded the U.S., imposed the
Napoleonic code and parliamentary government, outlawed
the Republican party, and imprisoned George Bush
for war crimes, after killing 2.5% of the population
(7.325 million people) and bombing NYC and Chicago
into rubble. How many French people would consider
U.S. resistance attacks on legionaires to be justified?
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Insightful)
> 6 months from now, if you were to look back at what you just typed, you'd see it's
> as wrong as predictions of slaughter of the allied forces.
I predicted no such thing; if you'll recall, it was the ones who thought that Iraq had WMDs that were predicting mass allied deaths. In a FAQ that I wrote at the timeon Iraq myths, concerning the myth "Saddam is developing weapons of mass destruction", I stated "Unlikely", and cited as counterevidence:
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Informative)
Jitter is definitely the kicker for VOIP, delay isn't that big of a deal. It takes some getting used to in regular conversation to have a >200ms delay, but I'd say anything under 1500ms could be tolerable with some experience.
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Since you brought it up :) (Score:2)
I understand about the delay. But how does jitter effect the call? What is it exactly?
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:5, Informative)
Our wirless broadband is fed by dedicated bandwidth over C-band satellite so the latency to our NOCs in downtown Baghdad and Basra is around 550ms but absolutely constant and reliable at that rtt, unlike VSAT services which are normally heavily contended and can indeed show wildly varying ping times in the 1000-2000ms range, indeed very bad for VOIP, either SIP or skype wont like that.
Of course round trip time is twice the delay that will affect voice calls, as voice delay is only the "throw" from my phone to your phone for a RTP packet. So around 1/4 sec of one-way delay makes for very acceptable voice quality.
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Something is really, really wrong with this picture.
$1 per minute? Sheesh. That's obscene.
Calls home should be free. Perhaps limited (or everyone would spend their time on the phone), but free.
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:2)
You can send soldiers prepaid cards, but they MUST be AT&T. I wonder how much AT&T is making off that contract?
(Apparently, you cannot send coffee to soldiers, either, since Halliburton already provides them with coffee-product-like swill)
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:2)
You can send soldiers prepaid cards, but they MUST be AT&T. I wonder how much AT&T is making off that contract?
So why not use VoIP via milnet? This should take care of both the cost and security issues. Hasn't anyone in the DoD thought of this? I mean, who was it that paid for all the design and development of the Internet? Shouldn't they know how to use it?
Granted, they'd probably need a few gateways to the phone system back in the States. Big deal; install As
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:3, Informative)
The milnet has limited bandwidth for a whole lot of uses. One of the things thats transferred is real time audio/video from drones and other planes/helicopters doing recon and search and destroy work. Theres always the communications chatter going on between all the teams out and about, etc. All of this also gets looped back to the Pentagon.
For the folks that run the satellites for milnet, they get about 15 minutes of "free time"
Re:Infidel dogs!!! (Score:2, Funny)
Yes. And they all, without exception have beards and are of a terrorist nature.
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:2, Insightful)
BTW: If you honestly think soldiers are out there 'for their country' you have another thing coming. All that I know have went there so they don't have to pay for college. Sadly, they timed it wrong and now they have a 1 in 75 chance of getting killed (current rate of mortality in Iraq). Others have went just becuase they can't get any other job.
Seriously, it's their choice to be out there fighting, why on earth do the
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:4, Insightful)
My favorite was this guy who said he would never shoot someone because he's a born again Christian. When I told him he better start firing if ordered to, he said he still wouldn't do it. I wasn't sure to laugh or cry. Fortunately he was an Air Force dude so he would probably never be put in the position to have to shoot anyone but it still irked the shit out of me that this guy was living a lie (I guess that's a perfectly Christian thing to do) and was in my fucking unit.
I actually joined the military because I wanted to server my country. Of course, I'm still no hero because I was fortunate enough to not have to go into combat.
"Seriously, it's their choice to be out there fighting, why on earth do they need to be treated like heroes? I'd understand if it was conscription, but it isn't."
Being forced into the military makes you a hero? That makes no fucking sense to me. Volunteering to get your ass shot at seems much more heroic to me (or stupid depending on your viewpoint). Being forced into combat just makes me feel sorry for you.
Our society is too obsessed with heroism. The people who are real hero's don't ask for fame or priviledge. Too bad our media has such a desperate need to call anything wearing any kind of uniform (military or civilian) a hero. It's devalued the term to the point of having little meaning.
Sorry for the off topic response, but I wanted to get this off my chest.
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:2, Insightful)
Something is really, really wrong with this picture.
$1 per minute? Sheesh. That's obscene.
Calls home should be free.
I have nothing but respect for these courageous people - understand that before you flame. However I feel obliged to point out that sadly they are not exactly putting their lives on the line for their country. Iraqi soldiers and policemen are putt
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:5, Insightful)
These fine U.S. soldiers of which we speak are in fact putting their lives on the line for the current administration's own geopolitical goals, which is not the same thing as fighting for your country.
I disagree. The soldiers may or may not agree with Bush's goals, but I still believe they are fighting for their country. They're fighting to answer their country's call regardless of the reason the call was made. They're fighting for freedom and many of them no doubt beleive that being in Iraq is a part of securing American freedom--your answer to that or mine aside. They're fighting for their families and their children. They might be in Iraq because of Bush's geopolitical goals, but ask the individual soldiers what they're fighting for and I think you'll get a different picture.
That said, bending the soldiers over on calls home is indeed despicable. I really have a hard time believing that with all the awesome technology the US military has--and all the R&D funding at their disposal--that they can not come up with a good, secure, cheap communications system to let a soldier in Iraq tells his parents he's still alive.
Re:Don't know where this guy is stationed but... (Score:2)
Skype (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Skype (Score:2)
Re:Skype (Score:2)
TelIAX, a Asterisk friendly VoIP provider, lists only $0.30 (USD) for Iraq.
http://teliax.com/rates.html
Re:Skype (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Skype (Score:2)
0.302 Euro excluding VAT (0.393 USD)
http://www.skype.com/products/skypeout/rates/all_
Much more expensive than http://teliax.com/ [teliax.com] that I mentioned earlier.
Re:Skype (Score:2)
Just tell your friends at home to leave their computers on, and they'll hear it ring when you cal, just like a "real phone", but without the VoIP "solution provider" phone bill.
Re:Skype (Score:2, Informative)
He means 1.7 Euro cents [skype.com] a minute. Although it's closer to 35 Euro cents to Iraq.
However, do give Skype a try. I conference call with friends in Europe and Africa from North America and some of these people are on dialup. It works very well, and it's free if you're not calling an actual phone.
Re:Skype (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Skype (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Skype (Score:2, Funny)
I don't think the army is going to call 911.
"Hello, is this the Iraqi police?"
"yes?
"Could you tell your buddies to stop lobbing mortars into our compound? We're trying to eat."
"ummmmm....we'll look into it."
Re:Skype (Score:2)
Latency (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Latency (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Latency (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Latency (Score:2)
(Over)
Latency (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Latency (Score:2)
Re:Latency (Score:2)
LEO Satelite (Score:2)
If you use a service like Iridium or Globalstar then you're dealing with LEO sat's which have much lower latency. They are probably only about 500km away.
Unfortunately i've never seen a data service faster than 9600 on an LEO satelite - you'd struggle to get any VoIP over that.
Given the huge per minute charges it'd make more sense just to use their phone service.
bandwidth doesn't matter (Score:3, Informative)
unless I'm wrong, which I'm pretty sure I'm not, but if I am, please post back! I'm sure my VoIP customers would most appreciate it
Satellite Internet has horrible latency, never min (Score:2, Insightful)
Balls (Score:2)
So cable connections go through it? That would explain...
Voip forums (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/voip [dslreports.com]
Ping (Score:2, Interesting)
(4 * radius of Earth) / the speed of light = 85.1002062 milliseconds
Don't expect shorter ping roundtrips.
Re:Ping (Score:3, Interesting)
This [usda.gov] might be a good starting point. Baghdad, Iraq to Washington DC, United States is about 9968 km, yeilding a
Re:Ping (Score:3, Informative)
he mentions uses Intelsat which are in geosynchonous orbits
that put them about 35,800 Km away. Up and back puts it at
71,600 Km, or about 0.238s or 238ms at light speed. As
already mentioned there is additional lag for the entire
system, hardware <-> satellite.
Okay Idea.. Wrong Tech (Score:5, Interesting)
But, if you're thinking about pooling resources, what about some type of satellite phone? Most sat-phones use LEO satellites, so latency isn't a problem. Its true, they are expensive, but if you are pooling resources, it might make it affordable and provide a better quality of service.
Of course, I'm not a soldier, nor do I personally know one, so I can't speak to what's really reasonable there. Also, I'd be curious to know what regulations the military has about personal communications equipment.
Re:Okay Idea.. Wrong Tech (Score:3, Informative)
The latency isn't the end of the world, it is jitter that is really a concern. Geo satelites have been used for voice for a long time, and while somewhat anoying, are perfectly usable.
USCG (Score:3, Interesting)
Gah, this pun even makes _me_ cringe... (Score:2)
Re:USCG (Score:2)
Hopefully this isn't a joke or something I'm missing, but uh..
In times of war, the USCG comes under the command of the US Navy. There probably aren't many CG vessels out there right now but there likely are some.
Boy when I was overseas things was different! (Score:5, Interesting)
Back in the day, when I was stationed overseas, the cheapest way to call home was a service that was hosted by ham radio operators. We'd call up the local ham who would transmit to a us-bound operator who would make the local call to the family. It was always weird talking to your mother to say things like "How are you doing? OVER!" all the time.
Re:Boy when I was overseas things was different! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Boy when I was overseas things was different! (Score:5, Informative)
the shortwave community can still make this happen, and does. I live in Chicago. Using a Sony ICF 2010 shortwave reciever a couple years back I picked up a military transport over Newfoundland. The soldiers on the plane were returning from Afghanistan. They were communicating with a HAM in Iowa, who was then patching them through for 1 minute conversations to family to let them know their arrival time in Washington. Pretty neat actually, and purely accidental that I heard the transmission as i was running up and down the dial listening for interesting things.
jeff
Re: eavesdropping on military transport (Score:2)
Soldier boy: "Hi Mom, can't talk now we're about to launch a top secret raid on Mizp'hak - those Iraqi's won't know what hit them"
Iraqi General: "Don't call me Mom"
Re:Boy when I was overseas things was different! (Score:2)
Re:Boy when I was overseas things was different! (Score:2)
A large segment of hams participate in the National Traffic System (NTS), which transports messages from station to station, sort of like a telegram. When the message is routed to an area where it is a local phone call, the receiving ham would call the recipient and read off the message. Not overly fast, but it is free and usually works very well. If on
Shouldn't this be supplied or something? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Shouldn't this be supplied or something? (Score:2, Insightful)
Go ahead, mod me troll.
Stick to instant messenger(s) (Score:2)
Instant messengers (Yahoo!, AIM, MSN, etc.) are free and, most likely, are much easier for your contacts in US to install too.
Good luck!
Re: Empathy out there? (Score:2)
It's easy for me to empathize with the desires of these soldiers . . . they are away from home longer than I am, and they are risking their lives. I can completely understand their desire for something more than IM and cheaper than normal long distance rates for hearing the voices of their loved ones . . .
Half Duplex, it'd have to be (Score:2)
Heads up (Score:5, Informative)
As a former theatre level Information Assurance Manager, VOIP works through the great DOD firewall in the sky (to include SWA). I know the current IAM and while he is a good guy, you never know when command is going to get in the mood to bust troopers for stupid shit (like non AKO IM). VIOP is against AR 25-2 and CENTCOM 25-260
Re:Heads up (Score:3, Informative)
BTW, I was the one locking down the firewalls in S. Iraq / Kuwait.
Re:Heads up (Score:2, Informative)
Grunts phreaking military comm systems (Score:3, Interesting)
One d
Re:Heads up (Score:2)
Vonage works great from Europe (Score:5, Informative)
Vonage says this [vonage.com] about satellite internet:
Yes, our service generally works with DSL Satellite Internet connections or any Point-to-Point Protocol over Ethernet (PPPoE) device (i.e. your home router). DSL requires Point-to-Point Protocol over Ethernet (PPPoE) authentication "username & password" to access the Internet so you will have to configure your Vonage adapter or home router for this service. There may be some latency inherent on a satellite connection or line of sight issues that could affect audio quality when making calls through the Vonage service. Our calls require 90 kbps of consistent upload/download speed to make and receive calls through the Vonage network.
Doing the math for bandwidth (Score:2)
so depending on how many people you want to be able to talk at a time, you should multiply that by the number of people and come up with your upstream traffic requirement.
I'd also recommend you pad that number by 50 to 100% because other programs that try to upload at the same time don't often play nice with Vonage. The bandwidth is supposed to be dedicated while you are talking but other applications try to stea
Used VoIP in Iraq/Kuwait (Score:5, Informative)
Worked great. As long as you only go through 1 sat hop, it really wasn't that bad. It's better than nothing. I used packet8 out there btw.
Back in the US,
ChiefArcher
Some Thoughts (Score:4, Informative)
I've had both satellite Internet (Starband...yeeech) and Vonage (after I was able to get cable). While I love Vonage, I would not want to dream of that over satellite latency.
On top of that, a 2-directional satellite system is unlikely to have the upstream bandwidth to make this smooth. Vonage has a "bandwidth saver" that you can enable, but that might be like pissing in the ocean.
That being said, a high-speed, albeit high-latency connection is a very very good thing(tm) even without voice.
Your bandwidth is still limited, so some traffic shaping and transparent http proxying might be in order.
For the communications side of it, perhaps set up a (possibly private) IRC channel where your buddies and family can hang out. You could even setup a local IRC server on your gateway box and link it with an ircd in the states. Don't know how much bandwidth you would save, but it would be cool.
My hats off to you and all of our fighting forces. Whether the war is just or not is an issue with the government, you guys go in harm's way every day.
Ask your local command (Score:4, Interesting)
1) Clearance to do this
2) Assuming 1) is OK, recommendations on local connections.
How about Linux-based multiple VoIP? (Score:2)
Free phone calls may be well-received by most soilders who are desperate to hear the voice of their love ones (delayed or not).
The core technology, that being said, is the Internet connection. You say you have it already.
Just ask one of the many USA-based>/A> LUG groups for a donation of a box complete with si [linux.org]
Latency.... (Score:2, Informative)
VoIP over Satellite (Score:5, Informative)
As others have said, latency is going to be a problem, but from that part of the world, your likely already experience the joys of satellite latency in your "normal" calls. Again, our experience here is that as long as you can keep your latency below about 750ms you're going to have usable calls. A big factor here is the number of satellite hops your provider is send you through. A single hop will keep you under 750, while two hops will generally break the 1000ms barrier.
Anyway, hope those numbers help you in your considerations, and take care.
You must be doing header compression (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:VoIP over Satellite (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm using http://www.packet8.net/ [packet8.net] for my VOIP. Their tech support [packet8.net] says that the latency shouldn't be greater than 300ms for effective use. My latency is usually between 900ms and 950ms. As long as it's under 1000ms, the call quality and voice delay is fine if not better than using
Forget QOS (Score:2)
Latency in this application will kill your sound quality far more than a few dropped packets. Optimally you'll want to be under 300ms for things to be manageable.
The other main thing to look for is a CODEC you can use with your chosen provider that uses as little bandwidth as possible and supports loss concealment. You need to worry about those two factors long before QOS becomes relevant to the equation.
A low cost option: PC-to-PC (Score:2, Informative)
Push-to-talk and voice-activated modes are offered. The client software offers enough options to (possibly) intimidate new users, but once configured it is as easy as it gets.
However, a previous post mentioned the use of AIM to communicate with troops overseas. Many IM clients are now integrating voice
Re:A low cost option: PC-to-PC (Score:2)
I've done it with Starband (Score:2, Insightful)
Speed of Light (Score:3, Insightful)
Think of what you see when you're watching someone on the news "live" from somewhere via satelite. There is at least a full 1-2 second delay before he/she responds to a question. Thats the speed of light delay causing that, you've hit a brick wall of physics.
You may still use VOIP - and the quality will not be bad - but dont expect any kind of normal telephone experience. You (and the people you talk to) could get used to a kind of walkie-talkie VOIP experience that may be the best.
Balad, Iraq (Score:2, Informative)
Skype (Score:2, Interesting)
Speak Freely (Score:2)
Speak Freely offers a variety of compression modes including some modes that'll squeeze your voice comms down to well under 14.4kbit. You can also enable solid crypto if you need some privacy. [
VoIP via SAT (Score:2)
VoIP guidelines generally say 150ms is the latency limit, but in my experience, jitter is more important to overall call quality. A stable, low jitter connection with higher latency will have a higher MOS score (sound better) than a high jitter, low average latency connection.
For reference, my config was usi
True... (Score:2)
Re:Deployed (Score:2, Funny)
Re:You're a Solder. Forget your family (Score:2, Interesting)
A soldier doesn't just kill or be killed. Soldiers have objectives that span the gamut from destroying to rebuilding, and from killing to healing the sick and wounded.
A soldier doesn't give up his family or friends. For many a soldier, his family is the single most important part of his life. The desire to return home to resum
Re:Pray I don't fucking find you, asshole (Score:2, Insightful)