VOIP Tech Chat → Re: [Voip.ms] VOIP.MS may have an outage right now

Oh and I also noticed that VoIP.ms completely misclassifies itself according to the FCC. They claim to be a non-Interconnected VoIP provider which is absolutely false.

Non-interconnected VoIP service The term “non-interconnected VoIP service”—
(A) means a service that—

(i) enables real-time voice communications that originate from or terminate to the user’s location using Internet protocol or any successor protocol; and

(ii) requires Internet protocol compatible customer premises equipment; and

(B) does not include any service that is an interconnected VoIP service.

Interconnected VoIP service.

(1) An interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service is a service that:

(i) Enables real-time, two-way voice communications;

(ii) Requires a broadband connection from the user's location;

(iii) Requires internet protocol-compatible customer premises equipment (CPE); and

(iv) Permits users generally to receive calls that originate on the public switched telephone network and to terminate calls to the public switched telephone network.

(2) Notwithstanding the foregoing, solely for purposes of compliance with the Commission's 911 obligations, an interconnected VoIP service includes a service that fulfills each of paragraphs (1)(i) through (iii) of this definition and permits users generally to terminate calls to the public switched telephone network.

Wrong.

They ARE listed as Interconnected.
»apps.fcc.gov/cgb/form499 ··· m=829776

-----

I hate to keep defending this company, but fair is fair.

Go read their TOS. They have it wrong there. And I will look at those other TOSs to see if they state not to use them as primary termination and state they cant guarantee quality.

Sounds like a bunch of Karens there. You have to prove negligence and malice.

An old lady "Karen" just called me at work today because she returned a call from a spammer that used my number for the Caller ID. I told her that and she was like "I'm going to call the Police". I said "Good idea". Go bother some one else Karen.

Are they going to sue Google or Microsoft when email goes down? They have the same stuff in their terms.

You are 100% correct, both in your assessment of the type of person that is threatening lawsuits and the fact that all providers have clauses protecting their interests in the terms of service

It is ridiculous, and sad to see people threatening lawsuits.

For one thing we don't have near enough information to determine how much at fault VoIP.ms is. Cyber threats are ever evolving. They could have spent tons of money on the best possible mitigation (unlikely given the price point, but stick with me here) and still get knocked offline by new attack methods. Also VoIP is unlikely to be as easy to protect as HTTP traffic.

DDoS attacks can be very tough to fight. Some of the security guys have had trouble keeping their sites online during an attack, even with help of donated resources from major anti-DDoS vendors.

Extended DDoS attacks are not unprecedented either. Other VoIP providers have been knocked offline, including some in the UK which appear to have been caused by the same group.

Again, if communications are that critical then maybe go for enterprise class service from a major telco provider. Even that can still get knocked offline (fiber cut, fire, flood, terrorism, etc). These guys also have clauses in their contracts about these kind of events. However they aren't as vulnerable to nearly as many types of attacks since even their VoIP traffic is run within a private network.

VoIP.ms is also showing indications that they are possibly making major infrastructure changes but are keeping it quiet to stay ahead of the DDoS attackers. Even long time trusted customers aren't going to get a lot of information about what is being done because the chances of someone blabbing about it here on this forum is too high and you better believe the bad guys are watching here for any inside info that could leak out.

Ultimately nothing is perfect.

A bit off topic but I keep feeling like Microsoft is due for a big outage. They frequently break their own stuff in various ways due to rapidly rolling out code that is not tested. They already struggle with support if something unusual happens within your account. It feels like it is just a matter of time before they have a big outage on Azure or 365, and if that happens it will make this incident look minor.

You misquoted the FCC classification, and that is so easy to look up.
»apps.fcc.gov/cgb/form499 ··· m=829776

-----

I don't need to "go" anywhere.

Rather, you need to go admit that you made a mistake as to the FCC listing, and you are making additional mistakes in denying the plain language of the TOS from other companies.

I didn't say *WITH* the FCC, as in their filing. I was referring to their own documents, such as their ToS where they have this in the definitions section:

"Non-IVoIP: Non-interconnected VoIP service. It is defined by the FCC as a service that enables real-time voice communications that originate from or terminate to the user’s location using Internet protocol or any successor protocol; and requires Internet protocol compatible customer premises equipment; and does not include any service that is an interconnected VoIP service."

Because latter in their 911 section they refer to this definition:

"Due to the quality variability of non-IVoIP networks, VoIP.ms cannot and does not guarantee your emergency call will go through. Many conditions such as loss of power, Internet access and or several other may cause 911 to be inoperable. VoIP.ms does not have control over those types of situations and therefore can not be held liable. VoIP.ms will do everything within its power to prevent service outages within its network."

They are not a non-IVoIP but they are claiming this applies to them. It does not. By the services that they offer VoIP.ms is an Interconnected VoIP Provider, just as they are filed with the FCC as.

So when I say I read their ToS and came to some of my conclusions it was in part based on misinformation they present to the customer. It was also based on sections that I didn't agree with and no, not the sections that appear in almost every ToS.

--

So someone claims that major carriers in Canada could be DDoSing VoIP.ms and that breezes by. I say VoIP.ms misclassified themselves, I got a full fact check and links to places to prove those facts. I mean, except for the actual place I was referring to. No need to look at that.

That's sort of what happen here on campus. VZ has a VOIP server on campus and we use a Private 10.x.x.x VLAN for VOIP traffic. But they had an external facing pop setup for external lines not directly connected to campus via Charter metroethernet, AT&T, or NCREN. That exposes even VZ to same kind of attacks. But the flood of traffic was from legit stolen credentials.

However, even large providers like VZ screw up. Campus is porting back to AT&T voip since AT&T has more enterprise fearures than VZ. Even now, porting over 30,000 lines takes years, so they are done in batches. Well...a few weeks ago, someone at VZ screwed up and dropped about 4000 DID lines that hadn't been ported. So no calls. And the fact that it took several days to add them all back once they realized what happened tells me it has to be done manually.

With VOIP.ms, it seems they are having to accelerate their transition plan that seemed to be prepping in stages before. So there are bound to be a few bus after. I would love to see them be able to allow more CODECS like Opus. But Glad that G.722 works now.