Author Topic: C*NET Publicity  (Read 7036 times)

Offline Fabius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2113
  • Porcelain Telephone Sign Collector
C*NET Publicity
« on: February 05, 2015, 10:51:30 AM »
While surfing the web looking for information on Magic Jack/VOIP I came across  this broadband forum and they have a VOIP forum. I posted about C*Net which generated interest and the question of why isn't C*NET better known. One of the members stated it was because, in part, "...that they made their mailing list archive private... which means you will never see a link to a posting discussing C*NET elsewhere on the internet."

I'll pass that on to the C*MET people.

Link to the forum:  http://tinyurl.com/kckvyzg
Tom Vaughn
La Porte, Indiana
ATCA Past President
ATCA #765
C*NET 1+ 821-9905

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2015, 12:12:54 PM »
Frankly, that is not necessarily a bad thing, IMHO.

The C*Net web pages can be found easily by search engines and people who have a sincere interest should have no problem finding the community.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2015, 12:16:00 PM by unbeldi »

Offline Fabius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2113
  • Porcelain Telephone Sign Collector
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2015, 12:32:32 PM »
Frankly, that is not necessarily a bad thing, IMHO.

The C*Net web pages can be found easily by search engines and people who have a sincere interest should have no problem finding the community.

I've got to disagree with you. It is a "bad" thing if you want to expand C*NET. The people on that broadband site defiantly have a sincere interest and didn't know about C*NET. I myself only discovered C*NET because I discovered CRPF last year. Finding the C*NET site is tough. Even if you know the name and that C*NET exists and look for it with a search engine it is buried in the results after CNET, which is different. Try finding it without knowing the name.
Tom Vaughn
La Porte, Indiana
ATCA Past President
ATCA #765
C*NET 1+ 821-9905

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2015, 12:43:23 PM »
Frankly, that is not necessarily a bad thing, IMHO.

The C*Net web pages can be found easily by search engines and people who have a sincere interest should have no problem finding the community.

I've got to disagree with you. It is a "bad" thing if you want to expand C*NET. The people on that broadband site defiantly have a sincere interest and didn't know about C*NET. I myself only discovered C*NET because I discovered CRPF last year. Finding the C*NET site is tough. Even if you know the name and that C*NET exists and look for it with a search engine it is buried in the results after CNET, which is different. Try finding it without knowing the name.

Hmm, I had no trouble finding it, and as soon as one is somehow connected with the telephone collecting world, like the clubs, it is hard to not notice.

Perhaps this is not as visible when one has no VoIP experience previously. I knew about it when it was first started and one of the founders inquired about something on the Asterisk support or developer list where I was very active.  But by the time I got interested enough myself, I had actually forgot about it.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2015, 12:45:22 PM by unbeldi »

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2015, 12:54:07 PM »
Also, I doubt that broad 'public' participation is desirable for a speciality interest collectors group. The intent was not to be an open VoIP network, but to interconnect historic switching systems.  As it stands, the N.A. numbering plan is relatively small and would quickly be exhausted as many newbies would reserve an entire four-digit block.
There are many general purpose free VoIP networks out there for other hobbyists.
As it stands, the support resources of the system are very limited already, and expansion would require substantial investment of at least time and expertise.

Broad public participation has ruined many good things of the early Internet.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2015, 12:57:24 PM by unbeldi »

Offline xhausted110

  • ***
  • Posts: 137
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2015, 04:46:20 PM »
The last thing C*NET needs is widespread publicity.
- Evan

youtube: youtube.com/user/thecooldude9999

Offline Weco355aman

  • ****
  • Posts: 253
  • C O Tech
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2015, 05:02:33 PM »
C*net should NOT be made public. The servers and dns is owned by 2 or 3 individuals and they do not receive any compensation.  The system could go away tomarrow. ALSO there is no real standards for the system, such as longdistance or the screwed up 911 crap. No one is policing dead Numbers, and there is a lot of listings that no longer active. Some people are afraid to leave there systems on do to the fear of spending $ on electricity. The original plan was to connet old SWITCHING systems to each other.  With the access to cheap ATA's others have been connected
which ALL of them are phone collectors. All it takes is a NUTJOB to screw up the FREE and fun toy that we have access to.
A very serious user.
P.S. there is very low calles over C*net
Phil

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2015, 05:30:25 PM »
The current C*Net ENUM directory for the US, country code 1, contains almost exactly 1300 entries for individual numbering blocks of 1000 numbers, this only 40 more than a couple years or so ago when I performed a measurement the first time.
These 1300 1299 records are divided among only 186 177 Cnet nodes in country code 1.
So, on the average, the average node has allocated almost a little over seven 1000-number blocks.
At one point I measured that approx. 10% of the nodes were down.

I haven't measured the other country codes, but may do that some time. The only other really significant area is the UK.

[PS: corrections]
« Last Edit: February 06, 2015, 10:17:43 AM by unbeldi »

Offline Weco355aman

  • ****
  • Posts: 253
  • C O Tech
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #8 on: February 05, 2015, 05:48:34 PM »
The stat's are interesting. Yes the U.S. is country code 1.
I know of a bunch of user's that only have 7 digit dialing. I have 11 digit dialing on my system
so i can call both PSTN and C*net numbers.  I personally know all of the parties that support the C*net system. The system works OK but there is no one actively watching/policing the  system.
The great thing is most Asterisk user's (not ATA users) can configure their systems however they want. The ATA users are at the mercy of the c*net provider.
My Big fear is a ATA will be used someday by accident to dial a 911 call. This will bring the FCC
and who no's else into the picture.
There was a case of child dalling 911 from a motel and their call did not go thru because of the STANDARD pbx code 9 then 911. The Parents have now screwed up a long standing well planed out standard because no one is enforcing the STANDARD's.   
« Last Edit: February 05, 2015, 08:47:02 PM by Weco355aman »
Phil

Offline Fabius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2113
  • Porcelain Telephone Sign Collector
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #9 on: February 05, 2015, 08:22:55 PM »
Thank you for bringing up some good points I wasn't aware of.
Tom Vaughn
La Porte, Indiana
ATCA Past President
ATCA #765
C*NET 1+ 821-9905

Offline podor

  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #10 on: February 05, 2015, 09:51:37 PM »
Not to steer this in a different direction, but I have an XLINK Bluetooth gateway that I use daily. I'm new to the hobby, so it may be common knowledge. It will convert pulse to tone, so you can even use your rotory for simple tone menus. It sounds great, as long as your cell is close to the gateway. It will only do about 1 REN, but Viking makes a nice ring amplifier for 4 REN and another for 10 I think. I use a 551b 1a2 set up in my office with magic jack for line 1, the XLINK for line 2, and I use 3 and 4 for my house intercom (a Viking auto ringdown with 1 half to the red/green pair and the other to the black/yellow pair). Both the XLINK and magic jack will ring through a 400D KTU issue 15 or higher, so I don't have to worry about ring amperage. Nothing like a few 565s ringing with my cell phone :)

Online Brinybay

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4362
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2015, 11:08:25 PM »
Link to the forum:  http://tinyurl.com/kckvyzg...

Where you said:


"C*NET is a free VOIP network of telecom enthusiasts."

With all due respect, I'm not a telecom enthusiast, I'm a vintage artifact and antique collector, of which vintage phones are one part that I have a strong interest in.  I'm not on C*Net because of all it's complicated computer configurations and special equipment needed that is of more interest to computer enthusiasts.   If it ever gets "dumbed down" to plug and play, I'll consider joining, but it should be kept low-profile.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2015, 11:11:47 PM by Brinybay »
The idea that a four-year degree is the only path to worthwhile knowledge is insane.
 - Mike Rowe
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
 - Anonymou
s

Offline Fabius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2113
  • Porcelain Telephone Sign Collector
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2015, 11:47:51 PM »
With all due respect, I'm not a telecom enthusiast, I'm a vintage artifact and antique collector, of which vintage phones are one part that I have a strong interest in.  I'm not on C*Net because of all it's complicated computer configurations and special equipment needed that is of more interest to computer enthusiasts.   If it ever gets "dumbed down" to plug and play, I'll consider joining, but it should be kept low-profile.

I bought an ATA from Shane Young. The price ($40 total) included him programming the unit for me and shipping. All I had to do was connect it to my router and I was in service. The nice thing about the unit I bought was it provided two lines. One line goes into my PBX which has classic rotary phones as extensions and the other line has a rotary Princess on it. Pretty much plug and play. The grandkids get a kick out of making calls on the rotary phone. My 18 year old granddaughter actually asked me how did you make a call on the 302.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2016, 08:06:21 PM by AE_Collector »
Tom Vaughn
La Porte, Indiana
ATCA Past President
ATCA #765
C*NET 1+ 821-9905

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #13 on: February 06, 2015, 10:07:19 PM »
It seems there may be only 25 distinct C*Net nodes in the UK.  The test is a little more cumbersome there because they have an open numbering plan.

Offline G-Man

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1957
Re: C*NET Publicity
« Reply #14 on: February 06, 2015, 10:56:50 PM »
 C*NET was originally conceived on the TCI listserve as a means for “Switchers” to “play with” and demonstrate their early electromechanical PBX’s and keysystems. It has quickly morphed beyond its original calling, with people using blocks of numbers to terminate their single-line instruments and electronic PBX’s.
 
If it gets collectors involved with telephony then that is good, however Phil makes a good case as to why it is not wise to publicize it to the outside world.