wifi phone - Page 2 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
 2Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #16 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-12, 02:03 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 7,463
Quote:
Do they charge a roaming fee while using someone else's wifi in another area? Roaming is a scam to begin with but that could make it outright fraud since the out of area call is being carried on wired networks they may not even own or maintain.
The info from Rogers is a bit confusing.

If you're within Canada, it's just regular usage, but if outside, then they say:
Quote:
If you are using Wi-Fi Calling while outside of Canada, the following will be deducted from your airtime and messaging limits included in your wireless plan without incurring any long distance or roaming charges:

Incoming calls and messages received from anywhere in the world
Outgoing calls and messages made or sent by you to a Canadian number

Roaming and/or long distance charges will vary depending on the roaming option you have on your account:

If you have Roam Like HomeTM, outgoing Wi-Fi calls or messages made to a non-Canadian number will incur the Roam Like Home daily charge. If you have already incurred this charge, then all outgoing Wi-Fi calls and messages made or sent within that 24-hour period will be covered under the initial Roam Like Home charge.
If you have a Travel Pack or other roaming add-on, all outgoing Wi-Fi calls or messages to a non-Canadian number will be deducted from the limit included in your Travel Pack or roaming add-on. If you exceed your limit, overage rates outlined in your Travel Pack or roaming add-on will apply.

If you do not have Roam Like Home or a Travel Pack or roaming add-on, your outgoing Wi-Fi calls and messages to a non-Canadian number will be billed according to roaming Pay-Per-Use rates.
So, if you're out of the country and receive calls from anywhere, there's no roaming charge, but if you place a call to outside Canada, there is?

BTW, I believe Roam Like Home is standard now and happens as soon as you use the phone in an area covered by it. I don't know how they'd tell you're outside Canada, unless they check your IP address.

I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...
JamesK is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-12, 03:41 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43░ N, 81.2░ W
Posts: 6,359
That's about as clear as mud but it sounds like they charge roaming and LD on wifi the same as if it were over cellular wireless. So if you live in Windsor, and you travel to Detroit and order a pizza from a local store over wifi, you get billed for roaming and LD as if you used wireless. If you use a free wifi app like TextNow, it costs absolutely nothing. If you use an online ordering app it costs nothing. What's the difference? The Canadian telco is charging exorbitant fees and making almost 100% profit on the call. /sracasm on/ It's nice to know Canadian telco paying customers get treated so fairly by their phone companies. /sarcasm off/ The old landline telco ripoffs we had to put up with when they were regional monopolies are back with wireless and as bad as ever. The CRTC was able to neutralize most of the landline issues by opening up competition in the marketplace. Now, the Canadian wireless telco cartel is ripping off Canadians with impunity despite alleged market competition. That's what happens when limited public resources like wireless frequencies get sold to a small number of large corporations with market control over multiple sectors.
ExDilbert is online now  
post #18 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-13, 11:46 AM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regional Municipality of Durham
Posts: 3,973
Here is the thing, when It first came out, I did not have a nation wide plan I had a bucket of LOCAL minutes like 200, so one time I traveled to London to do some work, and I was going to use my phone but I decided to turn on the wifi calling feature, when I did, I phoned back home to Toronto and this time did NOT place the 1 in front of the numbers, and the calls were treated as local calls for me. The thing about when you are making calls over Wi-Fi is that the cellular companies can NOT acurately get your location information so they were treating it as a local call for me, so I actually saved money by using Wi-Fi calling that day, otherwise if I had not turned on the feature and made the call as a cellular call, the cellular network would see that I was outside my LCA and would charge me long distance rates when I MAKE or Receive a call.

The only thing I am confused is how does wi-fi calling work outside of Canada now? back when I used it on my honey moon in the carribean, I was able to make calls as if I was still in Canada and I still have my phone bill to prove it that I did not get charged long distance at all. Tho the big companies might treat it differently now and can probably detect its not a canadian IP

Bell Satellite TV, 9400 HD PVR, 65 Inch LED TV, Smart Blue Ray Player, No sound system.
Paolo is offline  
 
post #19 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-13, 11:55 AM
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 7,463
Quote:
and this time did NOT place the 1 in front of the numbers
An aside, I have +1 in front of all the phone numbers in my contacts. That way I don't have to add a 1 or not, depending on whether it's a long distance call.

I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...
JamesK is online now  
post #20 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-13, 01:41 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43░ N, 81.2░ W
Posts: 6,359
@Paolo , I've got to wonder if turning on the wifi calling feature in this case routed the call differently than if subscribed to the 'official' wifi calling feature from the telco. Either way, I'm happy it's working as it should. Wifi calling should be charged at VoIP rates or be not be charged at all in the case of unlimited plans, without extra LD and roaming charges.

I've got to wonder how the CRTC would rule on this. If widely used, wifi calling could cut into telco revenues but that's their problem, not their customers'. Some internet companies are setting up hotspots using wifi modems connected to their systems. These create anonymous wifi access points on internet customer modems for use by cell phone customers. That could conceivably offload huge amounts of data from wireless networks by piggy backing on their internet customers' bandwidth. It's a nice idea in theory and I would support it if it was done solely for the benefit of customers. In practice, it could conceivably create a huge windfall for wireless carriers if the system becomes widespread. It could also create problems such as degradation of service and privacy issues for internet customers.
ExDilbert is online now  
post #21 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-13, 02:25 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 7,463
Quote:
It could also create problems such as degradation of service and privacy issues for internet customers.
The bandwidth required for VoIP is trivial compared to modern Internet connections. Also, I'd expect that traffic won't pass between cell and Internet users. Many WiFi APs can be configured to block traffic directly between users and multiple SSIDs and VLANs are used to separate groups of user on APs. Also, like VoLTE, WiFi calling uses IPSec encryption for privacy.

I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...
JamesK is online now  
post #22 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-13, 05:10 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43░ N, 81.2░ W
Posts: 6,359
I agree with all of that. However, the modems could be configured to replace wireless data and messaging as well as phone calls. What if someone nearby decides to tether his phone using the hot spot your router? Security is only as good as the configuration and I wouldn't trust a wireless carrier to always get that right for thousands of remote routers. Routers are already a major issue for internet security.
ExDilbert is online now  
post #23 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-13, 05:21 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 7,463
If this is something set up by the cell company, I'd expect at least a separate SSID, which would isolate cell users from regular. This is a very common technique in offices etc. For example, my Rogers cable modem could be configured with a guest WiFi, which has it's own SSID and cannot connect to anything on my LAN. I would never share my main SSID with strangers.

I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...
JamesK is online now  
post #24 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-13, 05:37 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43░ N, 81.2░ W
Posts: 6,359
I am aware of separate SSDs and guest accounts. Those are not what I was talking about. Even securely configured routers can be hacked and I don't trust ISPs to configure them well or keep them updated.
ExDilbert is online now  
post #25 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-14, 12:09 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regional Municipality of Durham
Posts: 3,973
Not sure if you guys know but in the states they had this thing called a "Microcell" where it plugs into your wireless router, and it is basically a cellular antenna repeater, it broadcasts a cell signal not a wifi signal and your phone must also be from the same carrier and it connects to it, but it has a unique Location Identifier so the cellphone carrier knows your connected to this unique cell site instead of the regular existing network. I am also not 100% sure but I also heard any data consumed by the cellular hotspot uses is not counted against your internet modem traffic, but that would never happen in Canada due to Net Neutrality laws, but in the states THey can get away with this. Also I think the cellphone carriers can bill you different rates for making calls on the "hotspot" compared to the true cellular network, which I know is definately possible. Too bad this does not exist in Canada it would definately fill the holes in our cellular networks. but I guess canada is leaning more toward wifi calling to fill the holes in its network.

Bell Satellite TV, 9400 HD PVR, 65 Inch LED TV, Smart Blue Ray Player, No sound system.
Paolo is offline  
post #26 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-14, 12:35 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 7,463
^^^^
Many years ago, I had a Nokia phone on the old Rogers TDM network that supported that. However, I was unable to find the equipment. Rogers did offer similar to business customers back then.

I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...
JamesK is online now  
post #27 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-14, 01:48 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43░ N, 81.2░ W
Posts: 6,359
Quote:
but that would never happen in Canada due to Net Neutrality laws
Not sure that net neutrality rules would even apply. Microcells would be popular for businesses because cell tower signals don't reach the top of very tall buildings due to the distances involved and the amount of steel used in the construction. Other large industrial and commercial buildings would have similar issues. It's use for small residential buildings would be limited because areas that don't have good cell coverage are also unlikely to have good internet.
ExDilbert is online now  
post #28 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-14, 03:08 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 7,463
Quote:
It's use for small residential buildings would be limited because areas that don't have good cell coverage are also unlikely to have good internet.
Actually, there are plenty of places that have good Internet, but lousy cell coverage. My home is one. I have a 60/10 Mb package over Rogers cable and I believe Gb is available, but cell coverage is OK at one end of my condo, but poor at the other. There are a lot of poor cell coverage areas, even in urban areas. Just last week, I was working in a Bell lab in Mississauga, that was 2 floors below ground level. That place had Internet connections like you wouldn't believe, but cell coverage, even on Bell, was poor. And this was in their Wireless Technology Innovation Centre!

I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...
JamesK is online now  
post #29 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-14, 04:25 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: 43░ N, 81.2░ W
Posts: 6,359
Lets get the terminology straight as well. What is being discussed here is a femtocell. It is a low power cellular base station that creates a cellular access point using an internet connection. A microcell is is a device that extends an existing cellular network to eliminate dead spots.

I wasn't talking about small cellular dead spots that could be fixed with a microcell or cellular extender. I was talking about widespread areas without cellular coverage. It's more likely that isolated areas in Canada will have cellular coverage and no or limited internet connectivity than the other way around. Cellular coverage is fairly widespread but there are many towns and villages that have no high speed internet. We don't even have access to Bell high speed internet for all areas in Canada's sixth largest city. We've had Bell cellular coverage for many years, including all surrounding areas.That's because ISPs don't want to extend wired infrastructure down rural or even city roads. Their wireless cellular arms will put up cellular towers along highway corridors and in towns in the same areas. Bell once covered all of southern Ontario with analog cell service, including parts of The Great Lakes. That changed when the analog system was abandoned but still applies in general.
ExDilbert is online now  
post #30 of 35 (permalink) Old 2018-02-14, 04:52 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 7,463
Quote:
Bell once covered all of southern Ontario with analog cell service
I recall looking at the coverage maps back in the mid '90s, when I got my first (analog) cell phone. Neither Bell nor Rogers (Cantel) had anywhere near total coverage. The parts of the Great Lakes the were covered were due to their proximity to the cities, etc. where there was coverage. Back in those days, once you got away from the 401 corridor, there wasn't much coverage from either company. Also, in those days, there were articles about using satellite phones to fill in the areas, but the cell network grew so fast that satellite phones wound up with a much smaller market.

I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...
JamesK is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome