I'm trying to implement a system that has an IVR component and must be Section 508 (accessibility) compliant. According to the 508 reference guide at http://www.uspto.gov/about/offices/cio/section508/04telecom.jsp this means:
1194.23(c) "Voice mail, auto-attendant, and interactive voice response telecommunications systems shall be usable by TTY users with their TTYs."
It seems like a DTMF-only IVR should be able to interact with TTY/TDD devices, but common modern IVR technologies (twilio, tropo/voxeo) have no support for TTY/TDD at all, and searches for tty/tdd + ivr don't find anything useful.
I'm sure we could code something up that could send/receive baudot, but 508 compliance is a common requirement and I don't want to reinvent the wheel.
How do organizations deal with this? Just rely on the FCCs free Telecommunications Relay Service?
When I was at Bell Labs, I added TDD detection to some of AT&T's DTMF detectors in the network. If this work has been extended to the current network, then you may be able use it in your application. Network-based IVR, the last I checked, was not for complex applications.
TDD is a simple protocol but is very vulnerable to "talk-off," that is, to triggering on human speech. The AT&T detectors were very robust against talk-off; if you write your own detectors, you'll probably want to use a separate phone number for TDD users.
Related
I was wondering if DDS could be used over the internet, and if it would be a good choice for online gaming.
I have seen on the RTI website that they support WAN, but does that mean I can subscribe to a topic from another participant that is on the other side of the world?
What would happen to the QoS guarantees if this was the case?
Thanks.
Disclaimer: I work on OpenDDS full time, but have no experience in networked games programming.
A internet-enabled DDS could be used for connecting game clients. Whether or not it's a good idea is something I can't answer at the moment with no specific information, but the QoS part is a good question. In OpenDDS, as far as I'm aware, we try to adhere to the QoS defined by the user as if it was a normal RTPS connection. This means using it over the Internet might require some tuning of the QoS depending on what QoS you want to use. For example if deadline QoS was being used on a local network, the time period might have to be relaxed given the greater latency of the Internet.
For OpenDDS, internet-enabled RTPS is described in Chapter 15 of the OpenDDS's Developer's Guide: http://download.objectcomputing.com/OpenDDS/OpenDDS-latest.pdf. In addition to using ICE to overcome NATs, we also have a feature called the RTPS Relay to enable connections when a client can't use ICE.
I'm not familiar with what specific capabilities RTI Connext here has but as far as I'm aware they are similar, in that they use ICE as well. Also it should be noted that internet-enabled RTPS is not standardized, so the Connext and OpenDDS wouldn't be able to be talk over WAN.
OpenDDS would only be appropriate for games in very constrained environments because of the bandwidth requirements. If all users are on the same LAN then the UDP multicast approach that RTPS uses would be effective for a peer-to-peer game architecture. However, if remote users are added, then the requirement of every peer having to send every update directly to every other peer will very quickly explode the bandwidth requirements.
Given that the RTPS relay is already another application that needs to be run, a game server that collates updates from peers and sends world state would be far more effective for cases where users are not all on a single LAN segment.
What I'm asking here may not be possible at all, due to my lack of knowledge with networks.
I want to start playing around with IOT objects in my house. I would love to be able to control various objects from the touch of a button on my phone.
I have bought a "smart" plug outlet which enables me to turn the power on or off via an app over my home WiFi, however I want to be able to build my own app and control the device exactly how I want to, just for fun.
This app I'm using at the moment comes with the outlet and as far as I can see, it was not meant to be customizable in any way.
My question is, is it possible to figure out the requests being made to and from the device, and create my own API to work with it?
I am a software developer day-to-day however my knowledge in networks is very basic. Any help is really appreciated!
If there is no documented API you can, in theory, to reverse engineer the API using sniffers. If you control the device from your phone you can install sniffers on the phone and see the incoming and outgoing requests. But the bigger problem for you is if there is some kind of security mechanism that the device and the app are implementing. The protocol can be encrypted so you wont be able to understand the network traffic or maybe some kind of key that will allow the device to get orders only from a specific app.
So my suggestion, if you are not experienced with this kind of work is to approach the device vendor and ask them for the API, some vendors would be happy to expose it if you would publish your code and let other customers to use it and expand their product.
Let me start with a full disclosure : I have been given a mission which is out of my leauge and I am 'grasping at straws' here.
the back story :
I have 3 different pieces of hardware . all of them collects the same data but stores it differently .
I wantto make a 4th hardware which will collect the data from all of the others and to do so I first need to choose which protocol is better for this job and implement it on thoose hardwares.
they are not connected to the internet but have a connection between them .
Once in my studies I learnt about SNMP protocol and from googling now I came across OPC protocol .
I can't understand what is the difference between them [as for my understanding both have alarm events , secure ,etc] , and can't find full info about OPC .
trying to understand which one is suited for me.
to clarify I am planning to implement my own version of DB in the hardware [for example on SNMP I will need to build my own MIBs/somekind of my own agent ] .
I agree that SNMP is a better choice in this case. But the explanation of OPC is strange in my point of view just wrong.
SNMP is designed to monitor devices connected to some sort of network like TCP/IP. Nowadays it is indeed mainly used in network equipment like router etc.
OPC is a protocol to retrieve data, alarms and historical data from a device.
Alarm is in the case of a PLC a real alarm. Like tank 1 is almost overflowing. Action is/must be taken.
OPC is not only used in Scada. It mainly used for software to communicate with PLCs and own written software. That can be SCADA-software, but that is not always the case.
SNMP is a general purpose protocol which is widely used everywhere to manage/monitor all kinds of equipment, systems, devices and hardware in different domains. Nowadays, it is a de-facto standard protocol used for monitoring/management of any type of entities.
In opposite to that the OPC is only used in SCADA domain. So it is kind of specific. I'd go with SNMP if I were you.
SNMP=Simple Network Management Protocol. According to my experience with it- it is far from being simple. So beware of using it unless you completely sure it addresses your problem best, e.g you have large and complex firmware and software and you need to sync interfaces between various departments of software engineers.
I would propose in simple cases as yours just to implement anything proprietary or use Prometheus which is far simpler and more flexible for changes.
Good Luck.
I want to build a decentralized, reddit-like system using P2P. Basically, I want to retain the basic capabilities of reddit, but make it decentralized, to make it more robust and immune to censorship. This will also allow people to develop different clients to match the way they want to browse it.
Could you recommend good p2p libraries to base my work on? They should be open-source, cross-platform, robust and easy to use. I don't care much about the language, I can adapt.
Disclaimer: warning, self-promotion here !!!
Have you considered JXTA's latest release? It is probably sufficient for what you want to do. Else, we are working on a new P2P framework called Chaupal, but it is not operational yet.
EDIT
There is also what I call the quick-and-dirty UDP solution (which is not so dirty after all, I should call it minimal).
Just implement one server with a public address and start listening for UPD.
Peers located behind NATs contact the server which can read how their private IP address has been translated into a public IP address from the received datagrams.
You send that information back to the peer who can forward it to other peers. The server can also help exchanging this information between peers.
Then peers can communicate directly (one-to-one) by sending datagrams to these translated addresses.
Simple, easy to implement, but does not cover for lost datagrams, replays, out-of-order etc... (i.e., the typical stuff that TCP solves for you at the IP stack level).
I haven't had a chance to use it, but Telehash seems to have been made for this kind of application. Peer2Peer apps have a particular challenge dealing with the restrictions of firewalls... since Telehash is based on UDP, it's well suited for hole-punching through firewalls.
EDIT for static_rtti's comment:
If code velocity is a requirement libjingle has a lot of effort going into it, but is primarily geared towards XMPP. You can port off parts of the ICE code and at least get hole-punching. See the libjingle architecture overview for details about their implementation.
Check out CouchDB. It's a decentralized web app platform that uses an HTTP API. People have used it to create "CouchApps" which are decentralized CouchDB-based applications that can spread in a viral nature to other CouchDB servers. All you need to know to write CouchApps is Javascript and learn the CouchDB API. You can read this free online book to learn more: http://guide.couchdb.org
The secret sauce to CouchDB is a Master-to-Master replication protocol that lets information spread like a virus. When I attended the first CouchConf, they demonstrated how efficient this is by throwing a "Couch Party" (which is where you have a room full of people replicating to the person next to them simulating an ad hoc network).
Also, all the code that makes a CouchApp work is public by default in special entities known as Design Documents.
P.S. I've been thinking of doing a similar project, but I don't have a lot of time to devote to it at the moment. GOD SPEED MY BOY!
What all would be the requirements for the following scenario:
A GSM modem connected to a PC running
a web based (ASP.NET) application. In
the application the user selects a
phone number from a list of phone nos.
When he clicks on a button named the
PC should call the selected phone
number. When the person on the phone
responds he should be able to have a
conversation with the PC user.
Similarly there should be a facility
to send SMS.
Now I don't want any code listings. I just need to know what would be the requirements besides asp.net, database for storing phone numbers, and GSM modem.
Any help in terms of reference websites would be highly appreciated.
I'll pick some points of your very broad question and answer them. Note that there are other points where others may be of more help...
First, a GSM modem is probably not the way you'd want to go as they usually don't allow for concurrency. So unless you just want one user at the time to use your service, you'd probably need another solution.
Also, think about cost issues - at least where I live, providing such a service would be prohibitively expensive using a normal GSM modem and a normal contract - but this is drifting into off-topicness.
The next issue will be to get voice data from the client to the server (which will relay it to the phone system - using whatever practical means). Pure browser based functionality won't be of much help, so you would absolutely need something plugin based.
Flash may work, seeing they provide access to the microphone, but please don't ask me about the details. I've never done anything like this.
Also, privacy would be a concern. While GSM data is encrypted, the path between client and server is not per default. And even if you use SSL, you'd have to convince your users trusting you that you don't record all the conversations going on, but this too is more of a political than a coding issue.
Finally, you'd have to think of bandwidth. Voice uses a lot of it and also it requires low latency. If you use a SIP trunk, you'll need the bandwidth twice per user: Once from and to your client and once from and to the SIP trunk. Calculate with 10-64 KBit/s per user and channel.
A feasible architecture would probably be to use a SIP trunk (they optimize on using VoIP as much as possible and thus can provide much lower rates than a GSM provider generally does. Also, they allow for concurrency), an Asterisk box (http://www.asterisk.org - a free PBX), some custom made flash client and a custom made SIP client on the server.
All in all, this is quite the undertaking :-)
You'll need a GSM library. There appear to be a few of these.
e.g. http://www.wirelessdevstudio.com/eng/
Have a look at the Ekiga project at http://www.Ekiga.org.
This provides audio and or video chat between users using the standard SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) over the Internet. Like most SIP clients, it can also be used to make calls to and receive calls from the telephone network, but this requires an account with a commercial service provider (there are many, and fees are quite reasonable compared to normal phone line accounts).
Ekiga uses the open source OPAL library to implement SIP communications (OPAL has support for several VoIP and video over IP standards - see www.opalvoip.org for more info).