Ooma tells me speed & jitter are ok but I have 0.25% packet loss on WISP

That's actually very good, especially with an RF link. Interference from co-channel users usually produces some packet loss. Try a continuous ping test to your WISP's router or access point (so that you're only testing the wireless path). For Windoze, something like: ping -t ip_address_of_WISP Look for missing packets and longer delays, which are a sign of retransmissions, usually due to interference or collisions. For more accuracy, try Fping:

The "PureVoice" feature may also be involved:

That can be packet loss, but my guess(tm) is that it's jitter or packets lots in the Asterisk switch.

It's not. Ooma does not tell you the end to end (POTS to your phone) packet loss. It only displays the packet loss between their servers and your Omma device. It does not show anything happening between the POTS line and the Omma servers, which can product garble, without showing any packet loss.

You old and new cordless phone does not do packetized data and therefore would not affect the packet loss. However, if the RF link in the cordless phone is defective or there is interference on the cordless phone frequency, then you would get garble from the cordless phone. Try testing the cordless phone at some other location with a POTS line, or temporarily replacing the cordless phone with a wired POTS phone.

I would say something about the included wireless handset that comes with some Ooma base units, but since you didn't see fit to provide the model you're using, I won't bother.

Google for "voip test" and you should find a variety of likely test sites. Try to find one that uses the same backhaul as your WISP or ask your WISP which VoIP test site they recommend. For example:

Play with the codec selection on your Ooma phone.

I forgot that Ooma has a speed test. It shows jitter, but not packet loss:

Hi Jeff, Thanks for your advice, as I'm also in the Santa Cruz mountains (other side of the hill from you) where WISP is the only thing in town (although Comcast threatens to bring up cable some day, which would put the small-guy WISPs like Dave & Brett at Surfnet, Loren at Hilltop, Mike at Ridge, and Bob at Etheric out of business in a heartbeat - all of whom I presume you know well).

I'm on 5GHz with a 30dBi Rocketdish with a straight shot, mountain to mountain, of about 25 miles by road, but only a couple of miles (maybe two and a half to three miles?) air-to-air (which is what counts).

The Ooma technical folks ran a probe, after trying to talk me into hooking the "modem" (I never tell them it's a transceiver because that just confuses them) directly to the Ooma box, where my Ooma box is hanging off the router.

The telephone base is hanging off the Ooma box, and then I use hand helds around the house. The problem is mostly on the handhelds, but I can't imagine that they're causing the 0.25% packet loss that Ooma tech support measured.

This is a good idea. I need to log it though, so I'm running a ping -t to an internal hop that I found using a tracert.

Is something like that what you are suggesting? C:\> ping -t WISP_AP_IP >> ping.log

I'll check that out, as if I find missing packets, that would explain where the problem lies.

Hmmmmm.... I'm not sure if I can tell that is kicking in or not, nor what to do about it if it does kick in.

I'm not sure what an "Asterisk" switch is, where googling,

It happens on almost all calls, so, I'd "think" it's on my side. (But that's why I ask for debugging help.)

It _does_ seem to be better (less garbled) when I use the wired handset which is directly connected to the Ooma device. That diagnostic, alone, might indicate it's the phones.

But do older (maybe 5 to 10 years?) Panasonic Costco phones cause garbling in and of themselves? And even so, as you said, they wouldn't cause 0.25% packet loss (they said the jitter was only 1ms where 20ms would be a problem, as I recall).

My bad. I apologize.

It's a Panasonic KXTG6671 base plus a few Panasonic PNLC1017 cordless charger units spread about the home. It was a Costco thing, which, in reality, I never did like so I'm looking for an excuse to replace it.

Looking at your next post, I first tried this:

Which reported 3ms jitter, which was more than Ooma had reported

Pressing the "Again" button reported a 15ms jitter, which is huge

And, one more time, in sequence, gave me a 2 ms jitter:

Go figure. The 2ms is ok, but the 15 ms is at the limit, or nearly so.

I also tried this nice suggestion of yours...

The second in the sequence came up with 4ms jitter:

And yet, the third, came up whoppingly high with 98ms jitter!

How is _that_ for lack of consistency!

The Sourceforge site says it's "designed to test your current Internet connection speed for Latency/Ping, Jitter, Download Speed, Upload Speed, Buffer Bloat, and Packet Loss", which seems like a good test for me!

Looking at that last suggestion, it seems to be an EXACT copy of the Sourceforge site where it came up with 4ms jitter & 0% packet loss:

Hey Jeff! Now that's interesting. Very interesting.

I normally do a "*82" or a "*67" but I didn't know about the others. The first thing I tried was "*#*#001" which reported "240828". Kewl.

Then I made a phone call using: *82*96-1-408-123-4567 which had decent call quality. I'll keep doing this "*96" stuff, which might be the cat's meow. Thanks.

Trimmed all your s*it, Ya dumb Prick

Try plugging an old style non-wireless phone directly into the Ooma and make sure your wireless phones and transmitter are powered off. Then see if the packet loss goes away and your Ooma phone call problems are gone. If so then your problem might just be radio frequency interference between your wireless phones and the Ooma especially if the two boxes are within 3 feet of each other.

If you don't have an old style phone you can get them at many retail stores for less than $8.00 or possibly even cheaper at a charity store.

Update:

The *82*96-1-408-123-4567 is working well, so far.

I'll report back of the *96 starts blurbling.

If so, I think I'll change phones to whatever Jeff may recommend that is available in a local Santa Cruz or San Jose Costco.

Very good. The benefits of using a low bandwidth iLBC 15Kbits/sec codec is somewhat negatated by the higher latency (delay) as compared with G.711 (64Kbits/sec uncompressed). It takes time to compress the audio, so watch out for echo problems.

No recommendation. Most everything I've tried in DECT 6.0 works. Mine is an AT&T something that I bought at a thrift shop. Just make sure your prospective phone supports DSC (DECT Standard Cipher) encryption: "Demonstration Listening to DECT 6.0 Cordless Phone Call with a HackRF SDR"

I'm out of action for a while thanks to yet another kidney stone. Y're on your own on this one.

Hi Jeff, Your suggestion has been working surprisingly well. Much appreciated the advice!

Hope you feel better soon!

You're one of the few people on Usenet who are always purposefully helpful.