78ms - and that's with a slightly ropey 3G signal (T-Mobile). Interestingly I appear to be getting a public IP address assigned to my phone - RIPE says it's part of an assignment called "MBB POOLS" so mobile broadband?
3 have done that for a long time but I didn't think any other network did.
It will NAT out to a public IP, which will be part of a NAT pool shared with many, many other users, it has to in order to route onto the internet, but they actual device IP your phone has will be 172.16 or something like that.
If you're on Android download 'network info II' (network info 2). This will display the internal IP on the network for your device, mine is 10.4.52.145 on Three, of course when you load a whatismyip website is NATs out onto the internet through one of a range from a NAT pool.
It will NAT out to a public IP, which will be part of a NAT pool shared with many, many other users, it has to in order to route onto the internet, but they actual device IP your phone has will be 172.16 or something like that.
Nope. The IP address reported on the phone is the same IP that the internet sees. No NAT, not a private IP range.
Nope. The IP address reported on the phone is the same IP that the internet sees. No NAT, not a private IP range.
It's not, I'm telling you it's not !
If you're on Android download 'network info II' (network info 2). This will display the internal IP of your phone right at the top under device IP.
Something you're using is mis-reporting, there's no way Three has 8 million public IPs that would be a ludicrous waste of money and anyway I've confirmed it on mine. No mobile provider issues public IPs to phones if only for security reasons above all else.
I do know what I'm talking about in this instance as it's my full time job, I'd be astonished and knocked out if that turned out to be true, but I don't believe it for a second.
Something you're using is mis-reporting, there's no way Three has 8 million public IPs that would be a ludicrous waste of money and anyway I've confirmed it on mine. No mobile provider issues public IPs to phones if only for security reasons above all else.
I'm on T-Mobile, but I do know for a fact that the 3internet APN (at least used to) does give out public IPs with minimal firewalling.
I do know what I'm talking about in this instance as it's my full time job, I'd be astonished and knocked out if that turned out to be true, but I don't believe it for a second.
I'd argue that I know what I am doing too. I don't like to blow my trumpet, but I have only recently stopped working for the world's leading network equipment manufacturer in a highly technical role (the one with the bridge-esque logo) and hold several of their certifications (meh, they were paid for by them). I know when I'm being NATed or not. I am not.
Wow, ok I'll be corrected on that then. Very surprised they do that. I suppose for the 3internet APN which is meant for broadband that is ok, but for the phone, the three.co.uk APN you do get an internal IP.
I'd prefer that on a phone from a security point of view anyway. Very surprised T-mobile give phones public IPs, very odd, I've never seen any provider do that on a phone service before.
Wow, ok I'll be corrected on that then. Very surprised they do that.
As am I.
I just tried connecting to 3internet on my laptop and it seems that they don't do public IPs anymore so you're right on that one. Less than a year ago I'm sure they did though.
And just to show that the iPhone isn't showing what it thinks is the external IP, here's the same phone with a 3 SIM inserted: http://imgur.com/UI4mD
Not connected (pun not intended) I would say. Backhaul to cell sites being provided by one company does not mean they're going to be the company of choice for a completely different task by what is probably a separate business.
It is, 'scuse this pun as well, all about networking.
One business deal opens the door for another to be forged.
Are you sure that is the real reason and nothing to do with the fact that NTL and Telewest were mired in debt trying to build out to the areas that they have?
They appear to be able to offer a largely consistent service across the few bits of the country that they bothered to build a network in - the TV and broadband offerings are mostly the same.
Yeah, it's definitely port of it.
Obviously the cost is another very large factor in it all, only BT are large enough to make it work on a nationwide scale but there's definitely other issues Virgin are having to address.
As for the consistency of the products they offer, it wasn't long ago when there were very large asterisks against some of their top-speed packages stating they were only available to customers in very specific areas - some people, whilst in cable areas, could not be provided with the fastest broadband speeds advertised.
Also, with regards to your other points, as I said before I'm not with Virgin myself but no-one I know who is has a bad word to say about them - I don't think any of them ever struggle to receive the speeds their packages advertise.
So that's all I can go on with regards to that.
I'm well aware of AT&T's reputation but that's entirely not the point.
And just because some people on here have better pings, that means precisely nothing.
The whole thing about averages is that some people are above and some people are below.
That's actually a bit of a security flaw to be honest, any app that opens up a hole, ssh, a web service etc then becomes accessible from the internet where attackers can directly access it, on a phone too, which has access to send premium SMS, or turn on the camera / mic. Very scary, I'd much rather be behind a natted IP on a phone.
I can see the case for it on mobile broadband, although I was under the impression they were all natted. I just tested it and got a public IP on a dongle using the 3internet APN, so you are right moox.
On the three.co.uk on a handset it's definitely internal though.
Still a public IP for me on 3 if I use the 3internet APN. I can run the ipwebcam app and remotely connect to it through my ADSL broadband on another device. Assuming this wouldn't work if it was not a public IP?
Still a public IP for me on 3 if I use the 3internet APN. I can run the ipwebcam app and remotely connect to it through my ADSL broadband on another device. Assuming this wouldn't work if it was not a public IP?
Exactly, that's probably why for broadband they allow it. For the phone APN it's internal. T-mobile give phones public IP's though seemingly :eek:
That's actually a bit of a security flaw to be honest, any app that opens up a hole, ssh, a web service etc then becomes accessible from the internet where attackers can directly access it, on a phone too, which has access to send premium SMS, or turn on the camera / mic. Very scary, I'd much rather be behind a natted IP on a phone.
I can see the case for it on mobile broadband, although I was under the impression they were all natted. I just tested it and got a public IP on a dongle using the 3internet APN, so you are right moox.
On the three.co.uk on a handset it's definitely internal though.
I'm surprised it's on their "general" APN. You'd think like 3 there would be a separate APN for "proper" internet where there could be a public IP and a normal APN with private IPs and NAT.
It looks like my laptop was playing up. I created a new profile (it's Lenovo's 3G app) explicitly setting the 3internet APN and I do indeed get a public IP. 94.196.x.x.
I thought I already set the APN but obviously not.
Exactly, that's probably why for broadband they allow it. For the phone APN it's internal. T-mobile give phones public IP's though seemingly :eek:
Hmm, they certainly didn't in the past (there was about 10 ips they came between) but a few years ago they changed to the 149 range (noticed this at work where the authorised IP ranges needed to be extended!) - had assumed they were still natted but there are loads of them (about 2000 at the last count from our 100 handsets) so they could well be public!
Aah... somehow I'd missed that they would be selling fibre optic broadband as well.
Anyone know who they're re-selling? BT or Virgin?
I can almost see myself going for an all-in-one style deal with home broadband and mobile.
Going back a couple of pages, you asked if they were reselling BT or Virgin. Well it certainly seems they (or rather MBNL) have started dealing with Virgin on the Mobile side. See here http://www.mbnl.co.uk/ethernet.htm
Since I don't know how EE and MBNL interact, it could be anybody's guess.
Going back a couple of pages, you asked if they were reselling BT or Virgin. Well it certainly seems they (or rather MBNL) have started dealing with Virgin on the Mobile side. See here http://www.mbnl.co.uk/ethernet.htm
Since I don't know how EE and MBNL interact, it could be anybody's guess.
Virgin does not wholesale their cable network, and besides it has very limited coverage.
Orange currently has a contract with BT to run their broadband network for them.
Both BT and EE claim that they can reach 11 million premises (at the moment) while Virgin can reach 13 million. So it looks like they are going to be using BT's network, as you would expect.
Just wanted to be the first to say this....
The iPhone 5 WILL work on EEs 1800Mhz LTE network!
Cool.
Shame I won't see it till at least next Christmas :rolleyes:
Thats bad news for Nokia with the EE exclusive on the 920 :eek:
No, it doesn't help a lot does it.
iPhone looks cool. not sure about the extra length.
5 rows of icons though.
To sum up, it's thinner with a bigger screen and LTE.
IOS6 the biggest change then!
Thats bad news for Nokia with the EE exclusive on the 920 :eek:
It doesn't make much difference to be honest.
Even if the 920 was available on all networks, it would still be directly up against the iPhone 5 on them as well.
Headphone jack on the bottom.
Makes much more sense both from the fact that my phone alway goes on my pocket upside down (because that's the way you hold it) but also, no more worrying about talking in the rain!
New lightening connector might be a bit annoying for existing kit but there is already an adapter. The really cool bit is its reversible. One of the most annoying things about the existing connector is I nearly always have it the wrong way around.
High frequencies don't carry as far or penetrate buildings as well per cell distance, so for that reason you need more cells spaced closely together, ideal for dense urban population.
On the other hand 800Mhz is best for rural areas as it covers a very wide coverage area from 1 cell, but that would be no good for a city as you'd have too many users all on the same cell getting very poor performance, fine for the country though where the number of users is lower and you need to cover much wider areas.
Think of each cell as adding a capacity of data just to pick a number off the top of my head 100Mbps of data total. If you have 5 cells in a dense urban area that's a lot of bandwidth that supports a high number of users. These will all be low powered cells and the cells further away will re-use the same frequency blocks, so you'll pass from cell to cell as you move around a dense urban area.
However in the countryside where there might only be 20 or 40 users actively using the service you could have a 4 mile radius 800Mhz cell belting out a high powered signal. Try doing that in central London and that one cell would cover the whole central part of the city and the network literally wouldn't work, the cell would be overloaded constantly, calls would fail, data throughput would be non existent, that's where lots of small low powered high frequency cells win. Hence the reason why some networks have a lot of little monopoles dotted around in urban areas, rather than a big power on a hill, it's all for high capacity data.
Comments
It will NAT out to a public IP, which will be part of a NAT pool shared with many, many other users, it has to in order to route onto the internet, but they actual device IP your phone has will be 172.16 or something like that.
If you're on Android download 'network info II' (network info 2). This will display the internal IP on the network for your device, mine is 10.4.52.145 on Three, of course when you load a whatismyip website is NATs out onto the internet through one of a range from a NAT pool.
Nope. The IP address reported on the phone is the same IP that the internet sees. No NAT, not a private IP range.
It's not, I'm telling you it's not !
If you're on Android download 'network info II' (network info 2). This will display the internal IP of your phone right at the top under device IP.
Something you're using is mis-reporting, there's no way Three has 8 million public IPs that would be a ludicrous waste of money and anyway I've confirmed it on mine. No mobile provider issues public IPs to phones if only for security reasons above all else.
I do know what I'm talking about in this instance as it's my full time job, I'd be astonished and knocked out if that turned out to be true, but I don't believe it for a second.
I'm on an iPhone and you can get it using the field test thing.
I'm on T-Mobile, but I do know for a fact that the 3internet APN (at least used to) does give out public IPs with minimal firewalling.
I'd argue that I know what I am doing too. I don't like to blow my trumpet, but I have only recently stopped working for the world's leading network equipment manufacturer in a highly technical role (the one with the bridge-esque logo) and hold several of their certifications (meh, they were paid for by them). I know when I'm being NATed or not. I am not.
I agree it's quite surprising but it is true.
In any case, here are screenshots.
http://i.imgur.com/shuR1.png - iPhone field test app showing 31.97.x.x IP.
http://i.imgur.com/5wXs7.png - Google result showing the same IP reported.
https://apps.db.ripe.net/search/query.html?searchtext=31.97.0.0&flags=&sources=RIPE_NCC&grssources=&inverse=&types=#resultsAnchor associated RIPE record
I'd prefer that on a phone from a security point of view anyway. Very surprised T-mobile give phones public IPs, very odd, I've never seen any provider do that on a phone service before.
As am I.
I just tried connecting to 3internet on my laptop and it seems that they don't do public IPs anymore so you're right on that one. Less than a year ago I'm sure they did though.
And just to show that the iPhone isn't showing what it thinks is the external IP, here's the same phone with a 3 SIM inserted: http://imgur.com/UI4mD
One business deal opens the door for another to be forged.
Yeah, it's definitely port of it.
Obviously the cost is another very large factor in it all, only BT are large enough to make it work on a nationwide scale but there's definitely other issues Virgin are having to address.
As for the consistency of the products they offer, it wasn't long ago when there were very large asterisks against some of their top-speed packages stating they were only available to customers in very specific areas - some people, whilst in cable areas, could not be provided with the fastest broadband speeds advertised.
Also, with regards to your other points, as I said before I'm not with Virgin myself but no-one I know who is has a bad word to say about them - I don't think any of them ever struggle to receive the speeds their packages advertise.
So that's all I can go on with regards to that.
I'm well aware of AT&T's reputation but that's entirely not the point.
And just because some people on here have better pings, that means precisely nothing.
The whole thing about averages is that some people are above and some people are below.
Also, we can all post screenshots: http://sta.sh/2rp2q7q85ld
I can see the case for it on mobile broadband, although I was under the impression they were all natted. I just tested it and got a public IP on a dongle using the 3internet APN, so you are right moox.
On the three.co.uk on a handset it's definitely internal though.
Exactly, that's probably why for broadband they allow it. For the phone APN it's internal. T-mobile give phones public IP's though seemingly :eek:
I'm surprised it's on their "general" APN. You'd think like 3 there would be a separate APN for "proper" internet where there could be a public IP and a normal APN with private IPs and NAT.
It looks like my laptop was playing up. I created a new profile (it's Lenovo's 3G app) explicitly setting the 3internet APN and I do indeed get a public IP. 94.196.x.x.
I thought I already set the APN but obviously not.
Hmm, they certainly didn't in the past (there was about 10 ips they came between) but a few years ago they changed to the 149 range (noticed this at work where the authorised IP ranges needed to be extended!) - had assumed they were still natted but there are loads of them (about 2000 at the last count from our 100 handsets) so they could well be public!
Going back a couple of pages, you asked if they were reselling BT or Virgin. Well it certainly seems they (or rather MBNL) have started dealing with Virgin on the Mobile side. See here http://www.mbnl.co.uk/ethernet.htm
Since I don't know how EE and MBNL interact, it could be anybody's guess.
Virgin does not wholesale their cable network, and besides it has very limited coverage.
Orange currently has a contract with BT to run their broadband network for them.
Both BT and EE claim that they can reach 11 million premises (at the moment) while Virgin can reach 13 million. So it looks like they are going to be using BT's network, as you would expect.
The iPhone 5 WILL work on EEs 1800Mhz LTE network!
Cool.
Shame I won't see it till at least next Christmas :rolleyes:
No, it doesn't help a lot does it.
iPhone looks cool. not sure about the extra length.
5 rows of icons though.
To sum up, it's thinner with a bigger screen and LTE.
IOS6 the biggest change then!
Even if the 920 was available on all networks, it would still be directly up against the iPhone 5 on them as well.
https://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/
Makes much more sense both from the fact that my phone alway goes on my pocket upside down (because that's the way you hold it) but also, no more worrying about talking in the rain!
Black & slate or White & silver??
Now I'm gonna have to go down to Plymouth and have a look!
Thank you for your explanation, very helpfull