NotQuiteLeet.com

So people generally understand Voice over IP as making phone calls over the internet instead of through phone lines. Speaking in the same general manner, this is correct.

This post is going to explain Voice and VoIP further using the Cisco CallManager product line for reference (CallManager 4.2 specifically).

Voice Telephony Fundamentals

It is known that the human ear can hear a range of frequencies from 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz, on the other hand the human voice generates frequencies from 300 - 3300 Hz. So what does this have to do with telephony? With standards in place and the long and short of how things came to be in the development of telecommunications/signal processing, the audible frequencies applicable to telephones are from 0 - 4,000 Hz, a relative frequency range of the human voice.

A critical component to the fundamental understanding of Voice is the Nyquist Theorem. The theorem, simply stated and paraphrased says, “for you to exactly reconstruct an audible signal (as in the case of telecommunications) you must sample it at two times the frequency being sampled, in this case two times 4,000 hz which is the max audio frequency for telephony. 2 x 4,000 = 8,000 Hz. So how is the sound reconstructed? You must take miniature recordings of x length(for example 8 bit long recordings), y number of times per second. This process is called sampling.

(more…)

How MPLS works is in fact dependent on a devices topological location within a network. To understand this we must look at a network and define the topological reference names.

(more…)

The scope of this and forthcoming articles on IP Communications and MPLS will encompass various technologies and applications like: Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS), Quality of Service (QoS), Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), MPLS VPN, Traffic Engieering, and MPLS AToM (Any Transport over MPLS).

In all its mystery Multi-Protocol Label Switching was designed to be a data carrying mechanism. That is, MPLS can transport Ethernet, ATM, SONET, Frame Relay, PPP, among other protocols through an IP network. As the years have passed since its formal chartering as an IETF group in 1997, MPLS has evolved in to so much more than what it was intended to be. Many useful applications of MPLS have evolved. Some of the most popular applications are MPLS Virtual Private Networks, MPLS Traffic Engineering, and MPLS Any Transport over MPLS (AToM).

Essentially, MPLS creates a unique layer 2 (data link layer) identifier for layer 3 (network layer) network information. MPLS places this identifier (a “label”) in a packet that allows it to be forwarded at the Layer 2 level in layer 3 switches or routers. It does this by use of a Shim header. This is why MPLS is often referred to as switching at layer 2.5. The “network information” mentioned are often referred to as a prefixes, nothing more than the IP networks that connect to and from the MPLS switch or router.

By the looks of it, this will be part 1 of a multipart series.

Yes, that’s right! The subject at hand is UNC Football QB Joe Dailey. I have faith in my Tar Heels, and Coach Bunting, but COME ON! Look… a QB’s weakness should never be following a receiver, or staring down his receiver with his eyes. That is a very prude fundamental flaw.

Four interceptions in the past two games, one of which cost UNC a potential victory. Two against Virginia Tech (with two more from Cam Sexton) which infuriates me. Now knowing that Virginia Tech leads the ACC in interceptions this decade (if I remember the stat correctly the announcers brought up during the game) why would you attempt questionable passes? Why in the world would you attempt passing in traffic? Why would you try to force a pass?

As a QB one of your main jobs is to pass the ball. Wouldn’t it be pretty obvious that the pass defense, conversely, is trained to combat that job? Wouldn’t a pass defense train to read the QB, and shouldn’t a QB at the college level be cognitive of his oppositions capability? All this being said Dailey’s “weakness” is equivalent to a professional sprinter not being able to line up in the blocks. Dailey’s “weakness” a fundamental intuition almost all QB’s have. To have this as your flaw should earn you a spot back on the pee-wee football squad carrying water… to the bench… from the field house.

(more…)

From: http://www.nysun.com/article/39212

A professor at Rutgers’s School of Business, Gayle Porter, predicts in a soon-to-be-published study that disgruntled workers who feel they are unable to turn off their personal digital assistants and mobile telephones will begin suing their employers for their technology addictions — and that such lawsuits could potentially cost corporate America hundreds of millions of dollars.

“If companies develop a culture in which people are expected to be available 24 hours a day, then they should be prepared for the physical and psychological consequences,” Mrs. Porter said. “Addicts exhibit extreme behavior and have no control over themselves. So a corporation handing someone a BlackBerry on his first day of work could be seen as enabling, even accelerating, a serious addiction to technology.”

You have got to be kidding me.

I would hope that one who plans on doing this kind of study places emphasis on the difference between addiction and fascination.

On another note, many other forms of addiction (like drug and alcohol addiction) are dependent on choices made by the individual. The realization of this control by the individual allows them to recognize rehab as a possibility, and a potential cure. I would assume people who are aware of their addiction would be smart enough to partake in actions that would curb it. Any effort otherwise is the fault of the individual, and an ignorant one at that. In the end who is really at fault? It seems pretty obvious to me.

With that being, if there was a shortage of frivolous lawsuits in the recent past, Im sure this will make up for lost time.

What really irks me is that these people crying addiction fail to realize their feeble attempt is a sincere and genuine insult, a taunt, a simple disgrace to people with real addictions such as heroin and methamphetamines. Those are the ones who deserve help, and not in the form of lawsuits either. In the form of support and compassion for their own efforts to seek help, prying the chemical dependency away from their own bodies. A dependency they cannot rid themselves of on their own. They must rely on people with good hearts, experience, and seasoned professionals (ie. counselors) who specialize in chemical dependency through a rigorous life changing journey.