Posts by JetSetJim

*if* the manufacturer retained this mapping (and presumably it would be the chipset manufacturer, and not the phone manufacturer as all this stuff is on a single system-on-a-chip like Snapdragons or MediaTek chips), then you can get an IMEI.

IEMI *is* used to authenticate a device when it attaches to the network, and certainly in the EU it is checked against a list of stolen devices so that in theory these are blocked from making calls, and so makes a stolen phone less valuable. I'm not sure how often this check is performed.

However, while IMEI is used to authenticate, it may not actually be stored anywhere - this may be implementation specific, although functionality should be present to do this in a standard EIR. Operators used to forbid non-locked-in phones on their networks, and so they'd need to use IMEI for that, however that's no longer the case, so it may well be that IMEI is no longer reliably stored at the operator for a subscriber. But you may well be able to set a watch for the IMEI so that when it is next used some lights flash, or whatnot, and that would get you the IMSI, and then, if it's not an anonymous pre-pay SIM, subscriber info follows, and call trace/legal intercept/geolocation can be activated for that device, and SWAT teams can swoop on locations...

Re: I guess plod IQ problems are universal...

Probably want to be firing off a request for information (suitably couched in legalese) to MediaTek or Qualcomm as those are the chipsets Moto uses.

MAC OUI lookup returns:

"F8:E0:79 Motorola Motorola Mobility LLC, a Lenovo Company"

Re: Wow, it's almost...

>The big "issue" with P.R. that is that you can end up with either No government because they cannot get a majority or no decisions being made because no-one can get anything passed in Parliment.

Good, that means no-one can fuck things up, just let the country bumble along - no-one gets to try and implement massive projects that are either doomed to fail from the outset (ID cards) or just plain not needed (HS2) until they can actually get a good concensus from everyone as to the cost/benefit of those projects means for the country.

Re: How hard is the approximate localization of a 2.4GHz sender operating in or near an airport?

It's actually quite easy to do good geolocation based only on the SIM, a variety of companies sell such software to the networks.

Re: How hard is the approximate localization of a 2.4GHz sender operating in or near an airport?

LTE SIMs, while usable and easy to source in an untraceable way, would be geolocateable. Wouldn't be hard to use that to find where the miscreants are by first detecting a SIM in an odd area of the airport and then backtracking to the controlling mobile. Dispatch black van with heavily armed officials to have a chat....

Re: Simple questions

In the UK, at least from a legal perspective, the red light overrules the desire of the emergency services to get past you. There have been cases of people getting nicked for running a red to allow this.

Obvs it's ok for them to run a red, but not you.

Re: Form an orderly queue

If the SDR is being run over USB, then USB3 is the interface of choice, not 2

Re: Form an orderly queue

> if it's just "under" your desk

yup - there's two, mounted in their little boxes, stuffed into a cardboard box with a big pile of cables. Tried to make a little LTE network for the office, using custom programmed SIMs and OpenAirInterface (which includes RAN and Core elements). Could get it to work, but needed GPS antennas to lock the timing sufficiently well. Nice little project. Needed reasonably powerful laptops to drive the radios, though. CN could be run in its entirety off a small laptop - didn't have many SIMs live, so not too much of a hit there. Even managed to get some licensed spectrum to use so that real mobiles could work.

Re: what a mess...

As far as I can tell, the API offers exactly what the current VAT submission web page does, but without the ease and simplicity. There are free offerings out there, mainly as an Excel bridge where you just fill in the 9 boxes and probably supply your credentials to submit it.

Reading the REST API for the "submit vat return" (plenty of folk linking the docs), it is literally a JSON formatted 9 box vat return, so complete overkill for a small business which will in no way make your records more accurate as it's the same data you're submitting anyway

Re: Nope

The Flat Rate Scheme still requires a VAT return to be submitted - so yes, you will be affected. All that's different is that the value you send for Box 1 is your flat rate percentage times your revenue, rather than the VAT you've charges, and the box for VAT on purchases is zero (*)

The s/w you use will still need to send the values for the 9 boxes (some may be calculated from the others), it's just that your calculations on what to put in the boxes are different to those not on the FRS.

(*) - something like that, anyway, I've jumped off the FRS as it was no longer worth doing for me (and I think there was some new regulation that made it a pain, but I can't remember what. Anyway, IANAAccountant

> as you will be having to re-steer the beam every few microseconds...

Not sure why you'd resteer the beam that covers a house (or a few houses) that frequently? The house ain't going anywhere

Re: 46.2Mbps fiber? @eldakka

Sorry eldakka, BT Infinity is a Fibre-to-the-Cabinet network, not Fibre-to-the-Curb. Terminology is not consistent around the world, and in the UK it's meant as Cabinet as that is typically where the fibre is terminated in the BT network.

> 20GB/month? For £20/mo? Seriously? That's better than or equivalent to landline? Even 100GB/mo?

> Rubbish.

Go check the price plans - Three has a SIM only deal for £27 with unlimited data, which includes tethering (aka personal hotspot)

I'm not shilling for Three, I'm with EE at the mo - but with those prices one has to start thinking about switching

> Interesting. Do you have any idea how many discrete beams can be created and/or how big an area they cover?

How much money do you have? Current stuff I'm aware of supports 16. In terms of Fixed Wireless, these would pretty much get nailed in place, and they may well not be just for an individual's use, and so resources can be shared with others in the footprint of the beam. For comparison, an LTE site would typically be sectorised into 3x120degrees. If a 16 beam antenna were used, then this would probably be 48 beams. As for area, make them narrower and they get longer. Make them fatter and they get shorter. They probably can do the same range as current 4G sites with a narrow beam width.

Re: potential to make cable and DSL as antiquated and pointless

> 5G is just Mobile Wireless. Fixed Wireless can deliver up to 16x performance but is MORE expensive than Fibre unless it's Rural 20km Line Of Sight. Fixed Wireless needs rooftop aerials and LOS to get the performance. Mobile, NO MATTER WHAT xG, is limited to roughly 0.8GHz to 2.3GHz frequencies (Physics).

If the antennas on the base stations were the regular omni/sectorised ones, I might agree with you, however with highly directional beam steering to fixed sites, there is much more antenna gain, leading to an increased range. Also, perhaps people will install rooftop aerials too - seems simpler than running fibre to the premises if there's no existing connection.

Agreed that LOS helps a lot, but it isn't the only option. Again, with a highly directional steered beam, there is lots of opportunity to exploit beam reflections to maintain a decent signal without LOS. This would be particularly applicable in urban environments with all that nice shiny glass to reflect signals off of.

Not entirely sure why you're limiting mobiles to 2.3GHz when there are already 2.6GHz deployments in the UK (Vodafone & EE, for example). 3.5GHz isn't that big a leap up, particularly when you're looking at fixed wireless devices, rather than phones. Sure, with a traditional masthead antenna that is not very directional, these would have limited range, and building penetration probably sucks, but that's not what these base stations are deployed for. You might be interested to note that 3GPP defines a few LTE bands in the 5GHz range (bands 46 and 47), even if I can't find anyone using them (probably for obvious reasons with current 4G equipment).

> The 5G is an excuse for Infrastructure companies to sell upgrades

Not sure I disagree with you here :) I'm sure there are lots of ways these new providers can screw-up or screw-over the punters, and I'd like to be damned sure I'm going to have a decent connection speed before changing to such a provision, but then I'm already on FTTP

I give you MBNL. There's also an agreement between Vodafone and O2/Telefonica, but that looks to be in renegotiation in London due to 5G trials.

True, it's not your nirvana of "one infrastructure network to rule them all", but it's something.

> Any success actually getting 20Gb down in a month, or even hahahaha 100Gb?

I've not tried, more than happy with a 1GB allowance considering most of the time I'm in range of 100mbps fibre-powered wifi.

I can understand how folks in little coverage can get frustrated, but I guess I'm fortunate in that the times I have clicked on a YouTube video while out and about I've not had any trouble. But for sure, fixing not-spots should be a priority

> Radio waves have limited bandwidth and unless you use beam shaping that bandwidth is shared by the entire catchment area. I can't find any information on what bandwidth is available from a single 5G mast but I'd guess it's a few Gb/s at most. Say it's 5Gb/s. Now put that transmitter in a town so that it covers 5,000 properties. That's a paltry 1Mb/s per property.

It isn't shared, 5G uses a lot of beam steering - see here for what looks like a prototype, but lots of work is being done on this now.

Naturally it won't be able to always have the situation where each user gets their own full capacity beam, but it'll be a lot better than sharing the bandwidth.

> If this costs more than a fixed line internet then they can, as far as I am concerned, forget it.

Given that the article mentions:

For example, there's no need for £240-a-year line rental. Overall Ovum estimates it's almost 50 per cent cheaper to deploy.

One would expect it to be roughly on a par with current fixed line costs (once everything settles down, at least - early adopters liable to be gouged). For example, swapping your current land line for a £20/mo LTE contract can currently get you a usage of 20GB/mo with EE, or even up to 100GB with Three. So get a SIM only contract and a SIM enabled router, preferably one that will take an external antenna. If you live in a decently covered area (YMMV), then you can already lose the BT copper connection.