 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / T-Mobile / May 2005Re-activating a SIM card--what a pain!
I misplaced my main T-Mobile phone last Wednesday, and still have not found it. Fortunately, I have a spare phone and spare SIM card. (Unfortunately, you cannot have two SIM cards activated on the same number at the same time, so the spare was not activated.) Friday evening, still not having found my main phone, I called TM customer service, and asked that they change the activation on my phone to the SIM card in the spare phone. (When I find the main phone I can just switch the cards, I wouldn't have to change the activation again.) I read the rep the number on the phone, gave her all the info to verify that it was really me who was calling, etc. She said that, although a new SIM card can be activated immediately, since I had used and deactivated this card before (for the same reason), it would take 24 to 72 hours to re-activate. I was aghast. I had already spent over 48 hours without cell phone usage, and now hoped that I would be able to use the spare right away. I had spent money on buying a second phone and SIM card from T-Mobile, I felt I should be able to switch between them without such a long wait in between. She said there was nothing she could do to speed up the process. I kept checking the phone, hoping it would work sooner rather than later. Last night (Monday) the 72 hours passed, and the spare phone still wasn't working, still getting the message "Unregistered Sim". I called customer service again. This rep said this SIM card (after reading her the number again) was still listed as deactivated. I explained to her that I had put in the request to re-activate the card over 72 hours ago. She spent a long time away from the phone, came back, said she saw the memo that I had called to have it re-activated, but it didn't look like it had been done. She said the only thing she could do was to put in the request again. I asked if it could be rushed, since I had already waited over 72 hours. She said there was no way she could rush it, all she could do was to submit the order. I asked her why it hadn't been re-activated yet, when I had put in the request more than three days ago. She said she had no idea, and had no way to find that out. I find this outrageous! I paid for a spare phone and SIM card, I think I should be able to switch between them without having to wait for days after putting in the request to do so. To me the minimum stated time of 24 hours is way too long, and now it's gone over the max of 72! Have others experienced this? Anyone had experience of this with other carriers? Do they all take so long to change activations? Why should it take so long, if they can activate a new SIM card immediately? (Of course they will want to verify that it is a legitimate request, but the info I gave to the rep on the phone the first time verified that it was I who called. Also, they should be able to check quickly that this card had been activated before to my name and cell number.) What is causing the slowdown? If I called again and asked to speak to a supervisor, would that help? Rather than just putting in the request again on the computer, couldn't thy get on the phone and call the department that does the reactivations, and ask what the hell is going on, why is this taking so long? Is there a particular number I could call where I might get better service. It sure would be nice if one could keep more than one SIM card activated on the same line. (Of course, I would never use both at the same time.) If that were the case, my spare phone would have been ready to use right away. Also, for people who have more than one phone (perhaps an Air Card as well, Pocket PC Phone, etc.), and switch between them due to different features, different form factors, etc., it sure would be nice to be able to switch without swapping the card back and forth. Do any carriers in the US allow this, more than one card to be activated on the same line? I believe I read something here once that it's possible to clone a SIM card, so that both the cloned card and the original are activated to the same number. Is that difficult to do? How would one do that? (I'm getting fed up with what I'm going through now with re-activation.) i'm suprised they let you reactivate used sim... afaik they don't do that ;-)  SignaturePete They do, I've done it before also. But they take wayyyy toooo lonnnnggggg! > i'm suprised they let you reactivate used sim... > afaik they don't do that ;-) > I misplaced my main T-Mobile phone last Wednesday, and still have not found > it. Fortunately, I have a spare phone and spare SIM card. (Unfortunately, > you cannot have two SIM cards activated on the same number at the same time, > so the spare was not activated.) You misplaced the handset, yet TMobile is supposed to drop everything to deal with your mistake? It isnt TMobile that sets this standard... It is basic GSM... NO GSM system will allow 2 SIMS to be active on same account anywhere in world. The technology has built in safeguards that preclude haveing 2 SIM for security and reliability.. It isnt like making a second key and getting two cars with same door keys and same ignition keys > Friday evening, still not having found my main phone, I called TM customer > service, and asked that they change the activation on my phone to the SIM [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > had used and deactivated this card before (for the same reason), it would > take 24 to 72 hours to re-activate. There is the point... actually two points... a. Technically they are not allowed/obligated to reactivate a used SIm except for certain specific situations. b. If you deactivated it, how is it T-Mobile's fault it was active? If you wished to keep it as a "spare" SIM, why did you wait until you "needed" it to attempt to get it reactivated? > I was aghast. I had already spent over 48 hours without cell phone usage, > and now hoped that I would be able to use the spare right away. I had spent > money on buying a second phone and SIM card from T-Mobile, I felt I should > be able to switch between them without such a long wait in between. She said > there was nothing she could do to speed up the process. If you were THAT in need of service, and you were advised IF possible woudl take taht long.. why did you not just go to a TMobile Store, purchase a new SIM... and then when other SIM was (if it was) released, you'd still have a spare SIM > I kept checking the phone, hoping it would work sooner rather than later. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > putting in the request to do so. To me the minimum stated time of 24 hours > is way too long, and now it's gone over the max of 72! There are various things that must be checked and verified, and if it takes 3 weeks, and they told you it would... Explain to me, since you are the all knwoing expert, what steps can they remove to reactivate a SIM that would reduce this time to your standards? > Have others > experienced this? Anyone had experience of this with other carriers? Do they [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to check quickly that this card had been activated before to my name and > cell number.) What is causing the slowdown? You specified above should take no more then 24 hours.. so you need to answer this yourself... > If I called again and asked to speak to a supervisor, would that help? > Rather than just putting in the request again on the computer, couldn't thy > get on the phone and call the department that does the reactivations, and > ask what the hell is going on, why is this taking so long? Is there a > particular number I could call where I might get better service. No a supervisor cannot change anything... There are only 2 ways to get a SIM reactivated (if it is eligile and able to be reactivated)... The regular method is to file an iternal form, which goes to a special group (no external phone number or email address is available) for review and action... I dont know if this is one grizzled old man in a basement of one of the call centers, or 15 dedicated but overworked techs... It just is... Only number to call IS CC... > It sure would be nice if one could keep more than one SIM card activated on > the same line. (Of course, I would never use both at the same time.) Do some search for GSM basics, then some back and say that again... It is not possible, unless one is hacking the system... > If that > were the case, my spare phone would have been ready to use right away. How about hanging on a little closer to your phone so you dont misplace it... I say that noting you didnt sya it was burgled or otherwise stolen... > Also, > for people who have more than one phone (perhaps an Air Card as well, Pocket > PC Phone, etc.), and switch between them due to different features, > different form factors, etc., it sure would be nice to be able to switch > without swapping the card back and forth. It aint happenin' > Do any carriers in the US allow > this, more than one card to be activated on the same line? No GSM system in the world CAN or will allow more then one sim on one number... > I believe I read > something here once that it's possible to clone a SIM card, so that both the > cloned card and the original are activated to the same number. Is that > difficult to do? How would one do that? (I'm getting fed up with what I'm > going through now with re-activation.) Have you got about 250,000 dollars to buy the necessary equipment to make a true and maybe functional copy of a SIM? >>> Do any carriers in the US allow >>> this, more than one card to be activated on the same line? >> >> No GSM system in the world CAN or will allow more then one sim on one >> number... Quite correct, Jim. You can have two numbers on one SIM (orange or vodafone in UK have this "Line2" feature) but you can't have two SIMs with the same number. Andy M --Tampa Bay-- Wrote: > Jim wrote:--- > Do any carriers in the US allow [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > same > number. Baal aye alyuh pussies!!! u never hear bout sim cloning?! how alyuh s dotish? when a sim iz cloned they obviously carry the same phon number!!! there is ah device which u can purchase to clone an sim.....so all dat crap u all saying bout u cant hav two sims with th same number, take it an push it up yuh ****!!! thank yo -- Baal > Andy M --Tampa Bay-- Wrote: >> Jim wrote:--- [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > sim.....so all dat crap u all saying bout u cant hav two sims with the > same number, take it an push it up yuh ****!!! English as a second language? Thus spaketh JohnF: >> Andy M --Tampa Bay-- Wrote: >>> Jim wrote:--- [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > English as a second language? http://makeashorterlink.com/?W36C2202B From Vodafone in the UK: Whether you already have several mobile phones with different numbers or if you're just thinking of buying a second mobile, MultiSIM will link all your mobile phones to a single mobile phone number, making your life easier and reducing your paperwork. We link all of your mobile phones to a single account with one mobile phone number, making life easier and reducing your paperwork. You can make calls from any of them but will only receive calls on the device that you've nominated. To receive calls on a different phone, simply type a short code on the keypad. Subscribing to MultiSIM is very straightforward, whether you already have several mobiles with different numbers or if you're just thinking of buying a second phone. In fact, you may not need to do anything at all except call us to activate the service. > > I misplaced my main T-Mobile phone last Wednesday, and still have not found > > it. Fortunately, I have a spare phone and spare SIM card. (Unfortunately, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You misplaced the handset, yet TMobile is supposed to drop everything > to deal with your mistake? You seem pretty hostile, Jim. Had a bad day? Yes, I spent money (to T-Mobile) on a spare phone and spare SIM card for such eventualities, so I do expect them to deal with such a SIM card change promptly, not to take several days. > It isnt TMobile that sets this standard... It is basic GSM... NO GSM > system will allow 2 SIMS to be active on same account anywhere in > world. The technology has built in safeguards that preclude haveing 2 > SIM for security and reliability.. It isnt like making a second key > and getting two cars with same door keys and same ignition keys However, I can easily get two keys for the same car, no? In fact, I got two when I bought the car. Either key will work at any time. > b. If you deactivated it, how is it T-Mobile's fault it was active? If > you wished to keep it as a "spare" SIM, why did you wait until you > "needed" it to attempt to get it reactivated? I didn't say it was anyone's fault it wasn't active. However, according to the rules of SIM cards, that you just delineated yourself (not quoted here) (although I wish it was otherwise) you can only have one SIM card activated on one phone line at a time. So of course the spare SIM wasn't already activated. Of course I didn't try to get it reactivated until I needed it, when I couldn't find my other phone that had an activated SIM card in it. I don't get your point at all. > If you were THAT in need of service, and you were advised IF possible > woudl take taht long.. why did you not just go to a TMobile Store, > purchase a new SIM... and then when other SIM was (if it was) > released, you'd still have a spare SIM Because, it was already evening, the stores were closed, I had already bought a spare SIM card, they would charge $20 for a third, and I was hoping it would activate sooner rather than later. Little did I know that after 3 days it still would not be activated. > There are various things that must be checked and verified, and if it > takes 3 weeks, and they told you it would... Explain to me, since you > are the all knwoing expert, what steps can they remove to reactivate a > SIM that would reduce this time to your standards? Now can you quote where I said I was an "all-knowing expert"? I never said anything of the kind. Now, could you please delineate what are all those steps that you are implying must be done to reactivate a SIM? Please list all the steps, and why it should take several days to complete them. > How about hanging on a little closer to your phone so you dont > misplace it... I say that noting you didnt sya it was burgled or > otherwise stolen... Thanks for the advice, Mommy (or Daddy). Yes, I'm sorry I'm not perfect like you are. I was very overtired and overworked last week, and I seem to have misplaced my phone, and have not yet found it. I wish I could be perfect like you, and never misplace anything. No, I don't think it was stolen. I checked usage, and there were no calls on the phone after the 15th of June. The first day I couldn't find it was the 16th. > Have you got about 250,000 dollars to buy the necessary equipment to > make a true and maybe functional copy of a SIM? Nope I don't. If I had that much money, I sure wouldn't spend it on that in any case, and I couldn't imagine anyone doing so. I have no idea about that (sim card cloning), just read a mention about it somewhere (probably on this newsgroup), and was just asking. I don't pretend to know about things that I don't know about. Now, take a break Jim, and don't be so quick to get angry with people who write here. > > " MS" <ms@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:<1087917834.552599@news-1.nethere.net>... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > You seem pretty hostile, Jim. Had a bad day? Noe just sick of whiners... > Yes, I spent money (to T-Mobile) on a spare phone and spare SIM card for > such eventualities, so I do expect them to deal with such a SIM card change > promptly, not to take several days. YOU had the other SIM activated, then deactivated... Not a simple update SIM issue... > > It isnt TMobile that sets this standard... It is basic GSM... NO GSM > > system will allow 2 SIMS to be active on same account anywhere in [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > However, I can easily get two keys for the same car, no? In fact, I got two > when I bought the car. Either key will work at any time. That isnt what I said.. read... > > b. If you deactivated it, how is it T-Mobile's fault it was active? If > > you wished to keep it as a "spare" SIM, why did you wait until you [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > when I couldn't find my other phone that had an activated SIM card in it. I > don't get your point at all. Again.. read... I stated why did you wait to have SIM released so could be resued until you needed it.. If (as you stated) had previosuly activated, and wanted to keep it as spare, prudent person would have checked and requested SIM to be available before it was needed... Then woudl be matter of simply changing SIM.. not going through reactivation process... > > If you were THAT in need of service, and you were advised IF possible > > woudl take taht long.. why did you not just go to a TMobile Store, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > it would activate sooner rather than later. Little did I know that after 3 > days it still would not be activated. Oh my goodness... The world revolves around you, and it is a shame that late at night, your phone couldnt ring... Charge you for it? So what.. they arent free in geenral, and you could always go thru reactivation (as prudent person who stated liek to keep second SIM available)... Stores werent open next day? You live in some location with REALLY strange blue laws? > > There are various things that must be checked and verified, and if it > > takes 3 weeks, and they told you it would... Explain to me, since you [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > steps that you are implying must be done to reactivate a SIM? Please list > all the steps, and why it should take several days to complete them. Your attitude.. and statements like it shouldnt take more then 24 hours... I cant list them, I dont have access to that information. The infomration I do have includes them checkign your account for history, checkign the SIM to be sure it isnt in use, or hasnt been involved in anything nefarious (including verfing wasnt stolen from store, etc.) Then when they get thru all of that.. then they see if the system will LET them restore it... > > How about hanging on a little closer to your phone so you dont > > misplace it... I say that noting you didnt sya it was burgled or [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > checked usage, and there were no calls on the phone after the 15th of June. > The first day I couldn't find it was the 16th. So it isnt "Joe Robber" or "Bernie Burglar" but your own issue... Yes, I do misplace things... But having worked as a mechanic, and engineer, I learned to maintain close contact with tools and things I do need that are that important... > > Have you got about 250,000 dollars to buy the necessary equipment to > > make a true and maybe functional copy of a SIM? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Now, take a break Jim, and don't be so quick to get angry with people who > write here. Im not "quick to anger"... Ive worked in customer service environments and you are making a whole lot of assumptions... Sure, maybe there is a better way to process SIM resuse, but Im sure it isnt a priority process... I have close friends who work in the industry who advise me and swap war stories... and I do know a fair bit about electronics... Just gets my goat when folks take a postion that they appear to claim blamless, but the whole company is agaisnt them "working" the system... > Again.. read... I stated why did you wait to have SIM released so > could be resued until you needed it.. If (as you stated) had > previosuly activated, and wanted to keep it as spare, prudent person > would have checked and requested SIM to be available before it was > needed... Then woudl be matter of simply changing SIM.. not going > through reactivation process... Are you saying that you can call CS and have a used SIM card released, without having it re-activated? So that if you ever need it in the future it can be activated quickly, like a new SIM card? Are you sure about that? (Do you work for TM, by the way? If so, what exactly do you do?) If so, thank you for telling me about that. If that's the case, I will do that when this current case is straightened out, get my inactivated card released, in case I need it to be activated in a similar situation in the future. (If I find the lost phone, which I certainly hope I do, then I'll have two extra SIM cards, and I'd get the third one "released" as well.) Why I didn't do that in this situation? I had no idea that was possible--to "release" a card without reactivation. Thank you for telling me about that. > Oh my goodness... The world revolves around you, and it is a shame > that late at night, your phone couldnt ring... No, the world does not revolve around me. Yes, I am paying T-Mobile monthly for use of their service, and I bought an extra phone and SIM card from T-Mo for an eventuality such as this one, so yes--I expect decent customer service, and for the company I am paying to get my spare phone I bought from them working as soon as possible. I don't think that's too much to ask. If you are a T-Mo CS rep, do you display this same negative attitude towards customers who call you about a problem. [Jim responding to customer]--"You expect me to solve your problem? What a shame, that the phone service you are paying for isn't working!! Do you think the world revolves around you???" > I cant list them, I dont have access to that information. The > infomration I do have includes them checkign your account for history, > checkign the SIM to be sure it isnt in use, or hasnt been involved in > anything nefarious (including verfing wasnt stolen from store, etc.) Oh, I thought you were the "know-it-all", you wrote as if you knew of "several steps" that must be gone through, justifying a delay of several days. Really, with the computer database I'm sure they have, a very quick check of the history of that SIM, which could probably be brought up in a few seconds, would show that the SIM was bought new by me, that it has never been activated to any other phone number other than mine. I really don't think that would take a week to check. > Then when they get thru all of that.. then they see if the system will > LET them restore it... And why would the system not LET them restore it? > So it isnt "Joe Robber" or "Bernie Burglar" but your own issue... I never implied the phone was stolen. Knowing that I sometimes misplace things, I prepared for that possibility by buying a spare phone and SIM card. I didn't know about the possibility you suggest (if you are correct on that) that one can release a used SIM card without reactivating it. If you are correct about that, I will do that for next time, in case it ever happens again. > No a supervisor cannot change anything... There are only 2 ways to get > a SIM reactivated (if it is eligile and able to be reactivated)... The > regular method is to file an iternal form, which goes to a special > group (no external phone number or email address is available) for > review and action... Well, don't you think that something is wrong with such a setup, that it is impossible for a CS rep to contact this "special group" of reactivators, no phone number, no e-mail address, nothing but that form? There must be a phone somewhere in the office of that "special group". Something is wrong with CS not being able to contact them, to inquire about a problem, etc. I'm not blaming the CS rep for that, but something is wrong with that overall setup, if that group cannot be contacted. You write above "there are 2 ways to get a SIM reactivated". Then you explained one way. What is the second way you were referring to? > > No a supervisor cannot change anything... There are only 2 ways to get > > a SIM reactivated (if it is eligile and able to be reactivated)... The [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > not blaming the CS rep for that, but something is wrong with that overall > setup, if that group cannot be contacted. Not necessarily so... I can imagine CCRs and customers calling in and deamnding, much like many customers do regardless... If they need to research and process them in special manner... I dont see any problem with this... Many companies use internal forms and email to notify or request action/information... Like my original post, you had options if the timing was "inconveinent"... > You write above "there are 2 ways to get a SIM reactivated". Then you > explained one way. What is the second way you were referring to? It helps to have friends in industry... > It isnt TMobile that sets this standard... It is basic GSM... NO GSM > system will allow 2 SIMS to be active on same account anywhere in > world. The technology has built in safeguards that preclude haveing 2 > SIM for security and reliability.. It isnt like making a second key > and getting two cars with same door keys and same ignition keys 'cept that you're wrong, you _can_ have two SIMs on the same number. Or three. O2 in Germany lets you get more than one SIM on the same account for a one time charge of Eu25 per SIM. Incoming calls and SMSs will onlly go to one, but you can set it up to first ring one, then the other. You can also dial codes on the phone to switch between them. You can at any point pick up either phone and dial. On the subject of car keys, it's actually somewhat more complicated... Modern car keys have an RFID tag built in to the key, so the car computer must be programmed with the RFID serial number of the key before it will work. Keyless entry systems are worse than that. The code from the key changes every time you press unlock. The car computer keeps track of the last valid sequence that it received, and it knows what the next in sequence will be. The car calculates the next N (where N is something like 10, or 20, maybe more) numbers, and will work with any of them. In other words, if you press the "unlock" button on your car remote too many times, it'll end up too far along in the sequence, and it won't work. There's a special technique you can use to resequence the car to your key. I've actually tried this personally and verified that it does work like that. The purpose of this is to stop somebody from listening in and sending the unlock code again. Since each unlock code only works once, you can't replay them. The car computer must know the serial numbers for the keys, and has a limit of how many keys it can handle. Some can only handle one or two. Modern garage door openers also work on the same principles. > b. If you deactivated it, how is it T-Mobile's fault it was active? If > you wished to keep it as a "spare" SIM, why did you wait until you > "needed" it to attempt to get it reactivated? ...because he can only have one SIM activated at a time? > There are various things that must be checked and verified, and if it > takes 3 weeks, and they told you it would... Explain to me, since you > are the all knwoing expert, what steps can they remove to reactivate a > SIM that would reduce this time to your standards? I think he'd prefer they skip the "sitting around doing nothing" and the "dropping the request on the floor and ignoring it" steps. Thank you Gopi! > > It isnt TMobile that sets this standard... It is basic GSM... NO GSM > > system will allow 2 SIMS to be active on same account anywhere in [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > I think he'd prefer they skip the "sitting around doing nothing" and > the "dropping the request on the floor and ignoring it" steps. > Thank you Gopi! > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > the other. You can also dial codes on the phone to switch between > > them. You can at any point pick up either phone and dial. Per a GSM engineer... The two SIMs are not the same SIM, and are not actually on the same number... The system that you refer to is essentially a special call forwarding system using a phantom number in the switching system... Thta is why you have to dial the code... If the number truly had two SIMs on same number, you should/would (in pure therory, not GSM function) expect both lines to ring or make calls at any time... Therefore, the previous statement I referred to was in fact correct.. You do not in fact have two SIMs on the same account... you essentially have two numbers, the customer just doesnt "know" the second number... > > > b. If you deactivated it, how is it T-Mobile's fault it was active? If > > > you wished to keep it as a "spare" SIM, why did you wait until you [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > I think he'd prefer they skip the "sitting around doing nothing" and > > the "dropping the request on the floor and ignoring it" steps. Was he "promised" a turn around time? My connection confirmed that TMobile will not guarantee that any specific SIM can or will be reactivated, and does not guarantee a turnaround time... And again, you as well are assuming that there is a room somewhere where folks do simply kick back and screw with such requests... I dont think that this is a major issue for TMobile, and since the very basis of the SIM is as it is, that there are very many persons working on this... > Was he "promised" a turn around time? My connection confirmed that > TMobile will not guarantee that any specific SIM can or will be > reactivated, and does not guarantee a turnaround time... Yes, I was--24 to 72 hours was the promised time period, usually within 24 hours I was told, 72 as a max. (There was no possibility mentioned that it might not be re-activated.) As I wrote, I really don't see why it should take that long, in spite of the "many steps" that you implied, but did not delineate. However, as I mentioned, after 72 hours passed, it was not re-activated, I called and they put in the request again, said another 24 to 72 hours from that time. The next day, frustrated by the long delay, I went by a T-Mo store and got a new card, and had that activated. I have had other problems since then, don't know if they are related or not. > The two SIMs are not the same SIM, and are not actually on the same > number... The system that you refer to is essentially a special call > forwarding system using a phantom number in the switching system... > Thta is why you have to dial the code... I think we're not communicating very well here. Nobody was suggesting that the SIMs would be identical. What matters is what I, as a subscriber, see. The way O2's setup works, I can pick up any of the MultiCard phones and dial the number I want to call directly, no codes needed. Codes are entered if I want to change the behaviour of the phones. Incoming calls can, for example, ring one phone a few times and then ring a different one. SMS can go somewhere else. Data calls to a different phone. That's what the codes are for. It doesn't actually matter all that much to me if there's a phantom number in there, I can't tell. It looks like I have one number. > If the number truly had two SIMs on same number, you should/would (in > pure therory, not GSM function) expect both lines to ring or make > calls at any time... As a computer scientist, that's not what I would expect :) The cellular network knows about my SIM card based on a secret key that it stores. This secret key is linked to my phone number in their database, but the network doesn't actually directly address my phone by its number. Somewhere there is an interface between the cellular system and the PSTN. In older systems, this would've just been a collection of analog lines. When there's an incoming call, the cellular system would look at the phone number that had been dialled, and would then do a database lookup and figure out which phone was linked to that number. Once it knows this, it can route the call from the incoming PSTN line to the phone in particular. The obvious way to do this is to have one number per SIM. However, even the very old systems could have more than one number per SIM - you could have separate numbers for voice, data and fax. THis was done because different network hardware was needed for the three different kinds of calls. The network needed to know in advance which kind of call it was. Some phones let you specify that the next call should be a data or a fax call, in case you don't have separate phone numbers for all of them. Why does this incoming number have to always map to the same SIM card? I can call T-Mobile and swap the SIM cards for my account manually. Is there a fundamental technical reason that this can't be done on the fly? You might need faster databases and such, but I see no technical reasons it can't be done the way I've suggested. > Therefore, the previous statement I referred to was in fact correct.. > You do not in fact have two SIMs on the same account... you > essentially have two numbers, the customer just doesnt "know" the > second number... If the customer doesn't know the second number, and people reach the second number by dialling the first number, does a mime in a forest care? You said it couldn't be done. It is being done. The existence of some super-secret invisible phone number that nobody sees is, honestly, irrelevant. > > The two SIMs are not the same SIM, and are not actually on the same > > number... The system that you refer to is essentially a special call [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > that the SIMs would be identical. What matters is what I, as a > subscriber, see. It wasnt suggested. It was stated. Based on GSM technology, you can only have one SIM on one mobile number. For the mutiple handsets to use same number (without using phantom numbers and fancy switching options) they woudl have to have exactly the same SIM files on their SIMs. This discussion was never really about "I, as a subscriber, see" It started as wanting to have a SIM reactivated, and then into being able to have 2 SIMs that could be swapped. That doesn't involve a seamless simple "see" issue... > The way O2's setup works, I can pick up any of the MultiCard phones > and dial the number I want to call directly, no codes needed. Codes [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > It doesn't actually matter all that much to me if there's a phantom > number in there, I can't tell. It looks like I have one number. Bottom line, as someone else explained.. You aren't on O2... If you are in USA... And it isnt just TMobile, ATTWS and Cingular, even Nextel's GSM network dont work with more then one handset (equipped with appropriate SIM) on one mobile number... > > If the number truly had two SIMs on same number, you should/would (in > > pure therory, not GSM function) expect both lines to ring or make > > calls at any time... > > As a computer scientist, that's not what I would expect :) Again it comes down to expectations versus system reality and practicality. > The cellular network knows about my SIM card based on a secret key > that it stores. This secret key is linked to my phone number in their > database, but the network doesn't actually directly address my phone > by its number. Linked in only the broadest terms. The actual crypto algorithm is stored on the SIM card. It responds to a query from the network and looks for and recognizes the specific response from the SIM. The code sent is not a specific response as in a code that is matched to your own SIM for example. Per the reference someone previously referenced, "GSM made SIMple": "The SIM card plays a vital role in proving that the user who is attempting to gain access to the network is truly a valid subscriber, and not a thief using a stolen SIM card. The purpose of the authentication process is to prove that the user has the correct IMSI [based on the SIM sequence number] and Ki. During the authentication process, a random number is sent to the SIM card, this random number and the Ki (which is stored in the SIM card) are processed through the encryption algorithm. (An algorithm is a math problem; you put a series of numbers in, crank them around and then you get a new number, called an answer) The answer is then sent by the card back over the air to the GSM network. Inside the network the answer is validated, thus proving that the customer has the correct Ki [hence correct SIM] without ever transmitting it over the air. (If we sent this secret information over the air, it could be captured and duplicated by thieves.)" > Somewhere there is an interface between the cellular system and the > PSTN. In older systems, this would've just been a collection of analog > lines. When there's an incoming call, the cellular system would look > at the phone number that had been dialled, and would then do a > database lookup and figure out which phone was linked to that number. > Once it knows this, it can route the call from the incoming PSTN line > to the phone in particular. The obvious way to do this is to have one [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > that the next call should be a data or a fax call, in case you don't > have separate phone numbers for all of them. GSM is not "Cellular"... Technically it is an entire different method of using duplex communication... Properly referred to as PCS. Older systems did not use SIMs... They did not use IMSI/IMEI. That is what made and make them much more susceptible to cloning and hacking. Sperate numbers for "fax" or "data" are not specically seperate numbers. To the user it is... but only for the designated feature.. If it was a true seperate number and so on, you should be able to receive calls to the handset when using "fax"... You don't... In old Powertel area of TMobile USA, they do still use sperate fax numbers... But they route the calls to the fax/voicemail system. It doesnt have anything to do with the SIM or the handset... It is simply the routing in the network... The determination is made in network... Call a fax line.. it will route with normally no ringtone heard on calling line, no ring to handset... straight to the fax handshake tones... > Why does this incoming number have to always map to the same SIM card? > I can call T-Mobile and swap the SIM cards for my account manually. Is > there a fundamental technical reason that this can't be done on the > fly? You might need faster databases and such, but I see no technical > reasons it can't be done the way I've suggested. The technology is not available within the actual switching systems to do this. In theory, sure it makes sense to consider... But any provider needs to bring all of the new technology into every regional switch, every MSC, even every BTS associated with the system. So we are now talking time, and most importantly money... TMobile for example has to look at the expected return based on (if the actual technology was/is available) the projected number of accounts that would benefit/use such a system change versus the actual and practical cost of making such a change to the system. Then it also comes down to a legal and practical basis of "opening up" the ability for customers to use multiple numbers in almost any case... With the FCC and NPA-NXX trying to keep up with the shrinking number of available numbers available already, I doubt that the current market would satisfy those two organizations to the point of allowing the flood gates to be opened to making multiple functional numbers available to practically every customer in US. In reality, I would imagine that the actual percentage of customers who would benefit or truly need such capability would be a small percentage of the total number of users. Hence, a small amount of ROI for placing the equipment necessary. > > Therefore, the previous statement I referred to was in fact correct.. > > You do not in fact have two SIMs on the same account... you [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > some super-secret invisible phone number that nobody sees is, > honestly, irrelevant. The original statement was regarding having 2 SIMs on the same number, not 2 numbers on the same SIM. I understood that was the gist, and from what I have read and heard, it is GSM fact, not newsgroup fantasy... . > Bottom line, as someone else explained.. You aren't on O2... If you are in > USA... And it isnt just TMobile, ATTWS and Cingular, even Nextel's GSM > network dont work with more then one handset (equipped with appropriate SIM) > on one mobile number... That isn't the point. We know that no carrier in the USA offers that capability (of having two different phones, both with separate SIM cards, both activated, on the same line). Someone here said that capability was impossible. Someone else wrote that yes it is possible, because they have that capability in Europe, with GSM systems. (And again, as has been pointed out, it doesn't matter to the consumer what technology is used to create that capability, whether or not there is a "secret extra number" or not, it just matters to the consumer that they have that capability.) So, the real bottom line on this subthread is, not to repeat that we don't have this capability in the USA (we already know that), but that it's good to know that this capability is a possibility, although we don't currently have it in the USA. Perhaps if many people requested it from their carriers, it could be a possibility in the future. Or if there is some FCC regulation that is preventing it (does anyone know about that), that we could lobby our lawmakers to make it happen. (The main purpose would not be for people who have misplaced handsets, by the way. It would be for people who own more than one handset, perhaps a PDA phone, perhaps an Aircard, etc., and would like to be able to switch between them easily, without having to swap cards back and forth.) > "The SIM card plays a vital role in proving that the user who is attempting > to gain access to the network is truly a valid subscriber, and not a thief > using a stolen SIM card. I do not understand that. If someone stole my phone, for example, that had my valid activated SIM card in it, they could make calls with it, which would be charged to my bill. AFAIK, the SIM card doesn't do face recognition or smell recognition, or require a thumbprint to work. How could a SIM card know if the person using it is a valid subscriber or not? Of course, when I realized my phone was stolen, I could call my carrier and ask that that SIM be de-activated. After de-activation, although the thief would have my phone, he could no longer use it to make calls billed to my account. But until I made that call, how would the SIM card "play a vital role" in determining who is a valid subscriber? And that would be just the same on a system that doesn't use SIM cards, CDMA for example. If a thief stole a CDMA phone, he would be able to make calls on the subscriber account, until the subscriber called and asked that the phone be de-activated. I don't see the difference between SIM and non-SIM systems in this regard, and how the SIM card plays a "vital role" in determining if the user is a valid subscriber or a thief. Can the card smell a thief? > In reality, I would imagine that the actual percentage of customers who > would benefit or truly need such capability would be a small percentage of > the total number of users. Hence, a small amount of ROI for placing the > equipment necessary. Not sure about that. Perhaps someone could find out the statistics regarding the carriers in Europe who provide that capability, regarding what percentage of its user base uses that aspect. I would guess that a lot of people have more than one phone, and some also a phone device such as Aircard, PDA phone, etc. For anyone who has more than one device, it would certainly be a great convenience improvement to be able to switch between the devices easily, without swapping SIM cards. In fact, people who now only have one phone might be more likely to purchase additional ones if they knew they could easily switch between them, without swapping cards. (It would probably help the phone industry to sell more phones.) Perhaps someone could start a poll here, in a separate thread--regarding how many people would like to be able to switch between phones and phone devices without having to swap SIM cards? (Of course, that is no kind of scientific poll. Still might be interesting. > The original statement was regarding having 2 SIMs on the same number, not 2 > numbers on the same SIM. I understood that was the gist, and from what I > have read and heard, it is GSM fact, not newsgroup fantasy... Correct about the original statement, and that is exactly what Gopi was referring to as well. You misunderstood him. (When he mentioned "2 numbers", he was referring to the so-called "secret number", which as he said, the user wouldn't care about anyhow.) > . > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > That isn't the point. We know that no carrier in the USA offers that > capability (of having two different phones, both with separate SIM cards, <snipped> > like to be able to switch between them easily, without having to swap cards > back and forth.) Whether is possible anywhere in world or even anywhere else in US... If you use TMobile and GSM service... It is impossible to use two sims or two handsets registered on one mobile number in any legal/legitimate form... > > "The SIM card plays a vital role in proving that the user who is > attempting [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > this regard, and how the SIM card plays a "vital role" in determining if the > user is a valid subscriber or a thief. Can the card smell a thief? The difference is... If I have a CDMA phone and so do you.. I hack/spoof your handset and capture your ESN et al... Program my handset with your information, I can make calls as long as you are not actively using the number... charges are routed to your account... calls can ring to my handset... And until you get the bill or check your charges... no one knows... With a SIM and GSM system.. only the one original SIM can be registered in the network... This may have been part of what you experienced with your Motorola handset last week... The system does its little authentication thing... Your handset registers... the system connects and allows you to use the service as you wish... At some point (this is from my friend) your handset may actually loose registration in the network, on the handset end... It may still think it is registered, but it does not have a "positive registration" and calls wont connect in any of several variations... You see "network" on your display, and the controllers in system "see" you in network.. but you aren't really connected for any of several reasons... When you try to initiate a call from your handset, it tries to authenticate again with the burst sent with the call attempt, but the system sees the previous registration in the network. It assumes the new attempt is bogus due to the conflict, and wont connect your handset... If I were to have access to your SIM and did a perfect copy (fairly hard to do anyway) and tried to register with your handset in network, Id never be recognized and would not be able to call on your service... So when you removed the battery, removed the SIM (doing a "hard" power cycle) the configuration in the handset "Broke" the stuck/hung registration... When you restarted handset, it didn't simply try to access and call, it completely reregistered, sending the correct information and resetting the network registration... Anyone from Tech Support will tell you how many ills are corrected with the service by doing a "cancel location" in the network and having the customer "power cycle" their handset. > I would guess that a lot of people have more than one phone, and some also a > phone device such as Aircard, PDA phone, etc. For anyone who has more than [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > swapping cards. (It would probably help the phone industry to sell more > phones.) But from a business standpoint, the whole concept allows an account to be used part time with 2 devices (or more) where the business coudl have 2 seperate lines generating capitol... full time... > But from a business standpoint, the whole concept allows an account to be > used part time with 2 devices (or more) where the business coudl have 2 > seperate lines generating capitol... full time... Are you saying here (it isn't completely clear to me) that it is better for T-Mobile financially with the present system, where a person can not have more than one Sim card activated to one phone number, because therefore they will buy two lines in order to have two active phones? I doubt that will happen much. People will buy more than one line so that different family members can have their own line. But very few individual people would pay for two lines per month just in order to have the convenience of switching between different handsets without switching SIM cards. I doubt many people are doing that now. But if there was a one time fee to have a second SIM card activated to the same number (I think the person who wrote how that was done in Europe said there was a one time fee for it), I bet a lot of people would do that, to have that convenience. I don't know what is preventing that possibility from occurring in the US, if it occurs elsewhere, whether there might be a FCC regulation or something. But if not, if there is no legal or technical problem that would prevent it, if T-Mobile started offering that capability here while other GSM carriers did not, and they advertised that, it would certainly be a selling point for T-Mobile, and could cause people to switch to TM from other carriers. So, I think TM might do better financially if they offered that capability, if there is no problem that would prevent them from doing so. (I really don't know about that.) Manufacturers of phones and phone devices would sell more phones. Now there is a disincentive for GSM users to get more than one phone per person, due to the inconvenience of switching SIM cards every time you switch phones and phone devices. If that disincentive were not there, I would suspect that the sales of GSM handsets would increase. For instance, I have a Pocket PC, a PDA. I can connect it to the Internet by connecting it to the phone with a cord, and dialing up through the phone. I usually don't bother to do so, however, have to get out the cord, connect it, etc., usually not worth the trouble. Have you seen the T-Mobile Pocket PC, that's also a phone? That would be a more handy Pocket PC to have-- has a phone built in, could make calls with it, could connect directly to the Internet with it with no connections, etc. However, I certainly wouldn't want it to replace my main phone, it's big and bulky, not a good shape to hold to the ear for phone calls, etc. It wouldn't be worth the inconvenience to me (as well as the cost of the device) of having to switch the SIM card back and forth from my phone to this device, however. If it could have a separate activated SIM card in it, I might consider buying one. >(I think the > person who wrote how that was done in Europe said there was a one time fee > for it) I just looked at the site that Gopi gave the URL for, that discussed this capability. There is a one time charge of 24.95 Euros to add that capability. (I don't know what the exchange rate of Euros to dollars is. Could someone fill that in?) No monthly recurring charges for it. If that were offered here, with a one time charge of $24.95 in dollars, I would certainly take advantage of it. Even if it were twice that (not knowing the exchange rate, but I doubt a Euro is worth two dollars) $50, I would gladly pay the one time charge. I don't know how many people are still reading this thread and following this sub-thread, but how many reading would pay that much to be able to have two phones activated on the same line, that one could switch between without switching SIM cards? (As I mentioned, perhaps someone might like to start a new thread with a poll asking about this.) (I've written too much about this already. Someone else start the thread, if interested.) I can see (at the URL Gopi gave) http://www.o2online.de/o2/kunden/myo2/startseite/multicard/ that O2 is publicizing this feature a lot, using it as a selling point to attract customers. (I can read German, by the way.) Are they the only carrier in Germany that offers this, or do others as well? T-Mobil Deutschland? If they are the only one, has their market share increased since offering and publicizing this capability? (If anyone knows, that might help address the question of financial viability.) By the way, the page says that up to three devices can be set up for the same mobile phone line, all activated and ready to use, for only that one-time fee. > >(I think the > > person who wrote how that was done in Europe said there was a one time fee [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > poll asking about this.) (I've written too much about this already. Someone > else start the thread, if interested.) > Are they the only carrier in Germany that offers this, or do others as well? > T-Mobil Deutschland? I haven't seen it advertised by the others, but I don't speak much German so they may have hidden it from me. I went with O2 because of the Eu5/month unlimited WAP plan. > If they are the only one, has their market share increased since offering > and publicizing this capability? (If anyone knows, that might help address > the question of financial viability.) Good question. One interesting point is the difference between the traditional European pricing plans and the traditional American ones. Up until the last few months, you paid a relatively small amount per month as a subscription, and then paid for all minutes on top of that. Eu5 or Eu10 would be fairly normal; Eu25/month would get you much cheaper rates per minute. You'd have drastically different rates per minute to call various kinds of numbers. The key thing here is that per-minute prices are quite linear. Unlike the US, where doubling your minutes is definitely not twice the price, it frequently is double the price here. Thus, by giving you multiple SIMs, they're not necessarily giving you the same thng as you'd get in the US. For Eu5/month you could get a free phone with a 24 month contract. With the non-linear US pricing scheme, you could get three phones and have people use them without paying as much per minute. Also, on a cultural level, everybody knows what a SIM is. Vodafone's logo is shaped like a SIM. Nobody's confused about swapping SIMs around. US customers are less likely to understand about SIMs. You've also got cool things like Nokia's car phones, not available in the US. Interestingly, phones you get under a contract are not SIM-locked. Prepaid ones are. >(I don't know what the exchange rate of Euros to dollars is. >Could someone fill that in?) You don't know how to find a currency conversion site or you just didn't want to bother? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply >Perhaps someone could start a poll here, in a separate thread--regarding how >many people would like to be able to switch between phones and phone devices >without having to swap SIM cards? (Of course, that is no kind of scientific >poll. Still might be interesting. I would, I'd keep one basic phone in my Cellsocket to serve has my home phone, and another, to carry. This way, I'd be free to pick any carry-phone I wanted, without worrying whether or not it would be compatible with the Cellsocket. Ideally, these phones would act like wired phone extensions.. Only one could make calls at a time. Although, for multiple users, it would be nice to have a way to allow the other user to join a conversation in progress. On an incoming call, both phones would ring. If both are answered, both people end up talking to the caller. One number, multiple phones.. It's been useful with wired phones for years, why not with wireless? To reply, please remove one letter from each side of "@" Spammers are VERMIN. Please kill them all. > > I think we're not communicating very well here. Nobody was suggesting > > that the SIMs would be identical. What matters is what I, as a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > number (without using phantom numbers and fancy switching options) they > woudl have to have exactly the same SIM files on their SIMs. I've explained below how you could do it without phantom numbers or a duplicate SIM. It's really not that hard, as long as your phone switches are linked to your central database. > This discussion was never really about "I, as a subscriber, see" It started > as wanting to have a SIM reactivated, and then into being able to have 2 > SIMs that could be swapped. That doesn't involve a seamless simple "see" > issue... If you have an O2 Multicard setup, you can do the following: Carry a phone with you normally. Your backup phone and SIM are at home and turned off. If you lose your phone, you turn on the new one, and your calls will immediately go straight to it. That's seamless. That's simple. You can add more complicated features if you want, like ringing one phone and then the other, but you don't need to if you don't want to. http://www.o2online.de/o2/kunden/myo2/startseite/multicard/ Use google or babelfish to translate. > Bottom line, as someone else explained.. You aren't on O2... If you are in > USA... And it isnt just TMobile, ATTWS and Cingular, even Nextel's GSM > network dont work with more then one handset (equipped with appropriate SIM) > on one mobile number... You said the GSM system did not permit it. You didn't say that the ROI was insufficient. You didn't say that nobody wanted it. You said it couldn't be done. It is being done. Also, Nextel isn't GSM, it's iDen. They've been using GSM-standard SIMs in some of their phones so you can roam internationally, and they even have an iDen/GSM dual standard phone. But they're not GSM. > > The cellular network knows about my SIM card based on a secret key > > that it stores. This secret key is linked to my phone number in their > > database, but the network doesn't actually directly address my phone > > by its number. > Linked in only the broadest terms. The actual crypto algorithm is stored on > the SIM card. There are crypto algorithms in the phone, the SIM card, and the network switching software. The low level details of the key exchange are not relevant to this discussion. Information in a database entry is used to talk to my SIM card. The only point I was making was that my phone number is not a part of that information exchange - the GSM network can talk to my phone independant of my phone's actual number. > It responds to a query from the network and looks for and > recognizes the specific response from the SIM. The code sent is not a > specific response as in a code that is matched to your own SIM for example. > > Per the reference someone previously referenced, "GSM made SIMple": <snip> This doesn't disagree with my initial claim: the GSM switching system had a way to interact with my SIM card. When a phone call for me comes in, it looks up which SIM is associated with my phone number, and tells that SIM to start ringing. Let me try to explain this simply: At the interface between the cellular system and the PSTN, an incoming call comes in with the phone number 12345. The GSM switching system looks at that number, and looks up the number in its database. It might one of the following: *Play a message saying the number doesn't exist *Forward the call to another number, voicemail, etc. *Decide that the call should ring a cellphone. If it does the last thing on the list, it looks up in its database which SIM card it should ring. Normally there would be a single SIM. The GSM network then talks to the SIM/phone, and tells it to ring. If it answers, then it establishes a voice channel and you talk. Now, _why_ can't it have a list of two or three SIMs there? It tries to communicate with the first one. If it's not in range, for example, then it goes back and tries to communicate with the second one? On my phone, I can dial a special number which tells the system to change the order it checks the SIMs, say. The way I just described that would involve two fully standard, normal SIMs, and one single incoming phone number, no special phantom numbers, no weird tricks. If this isn't possible, then please explain why. And please _don't_ explain how somebody who didn't understand database or communications technology would expect some strange stupid thing to happen. > GSM is not "Cellular"... Technically it is an entire different method of > using duplex communication... Properly referred to as PCS. GSM is a form of cellular, and AMPS is a form of cellular. The term celllular refers to the cells that are used, and, if I'm not mistaken, GSM does in fact use cells. Using the generic term celllular to refer only to AMPS is the same as using TDMA to refer to IS-136. http://www.iec.org/online/tutorials/gsm/ "Global system for mobile communication (GSM) is a globally accepted standard for digital cellular communication." If you're going to be pedantic, please try to be correct. > Sperate numbers for "fax" or "data" are not specically seperate numbers. To > the user it is... but only for the designated feature.. If it was a true > seperate number and so on, you should be able to receive calls to the > handset when using "fax"... You don't... In old Powertel area of TMobile Really? Why? Let me try this another way: Let's say we have two phone exchanges. They have the usual switches, and lines going to peoples' houses. In between these two exchanges, we have many lines that are used when people on one exchange want to call people on the other exchange. Are there as many phone lines between the exchanges as there are people on each exchange? Of course not. If every single person in NYC tries to call every single person in Los Angeles, it won't work. Does this mean that those people don't have "real" phone numbers? Of course not. Have you ever done conference calling using a GSM phone? Multiple people can call my single phone number, all at the same time. I can switch between different people, and I can also combine mutliple people into a single call. I can do this on the fly, without needing to arrange this in advance. For example: Alice calls me. I am speaking to her. Now Bob calls. I put Alice on hold, and speak to Bob. Now I tell my phone to combine Alice and Bob. I can now speak to them both at the same time. Charlie calls. I put the Alice+Bob conference call hold and speak to Charlie. Now I remove Bob from the conference call and add Charlie to Alice. See? Even with a single incoming voice-only number, there can be _multiple_ concurrent incoming calls. The limitation is that there can only be one active voice channel between my handset and the network. I hope I've made it abundantly clear at this point that it's wrong to equate "real number" with concurrently usable number. We're long past the days of physical rotary devices connecting our calls > USA, they do still use sperate fax numbers... But they route the calls to > the fax/voicemail system. It doesnt have anything to do with the SIM or the > handset... It is simply the routing in the network... The determination is > made in network... Call a fax line.. it will route with normally no ringtone > heard on calling line, no ring to handset... straight to the fax handshake > tones... Interesting. That's not how it works in most normal GSM systems. Back in the mid 1990s when I was doing a lot of CSD on a 900MHz GSM system in Kuwait, I had a separate data number. If you dialled my data number, my phone would ring and display "Data Call." The caller would hear standard ringing tones. If I had my data PCMCIA interface plugged in to my phone, I could type "ATA" and answer the call, and then they would hear the modem handshaking tones. Sounds a lot like a real, separate number to me. > > Why does this incoming number have to always map to the same SIM card? > > I can call T-Mobile and swap the SIM cards for my account manually. Is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > The technology is not available within the actual switching systems to do > this. In theory, sure it makes sense to consider... But any provider needs <snip> Irrelevant. You said it wasn't possible, not that it wasn't economically viable for a US carrier. Your original statement was incorrect. > > If the customer doesn't know the second number, and people reach the > > second number by dialling the first number, does a mime in a forest [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > numbers on the same SIM. I understood that was the gist, and from what I > have read and heard, it is GSM fact, not newsgroup fantasy... "newsgroup fantasy" is people claiming something's impossible because they don't know how it could be done. > > > I think we're not communicating very well here. Nobody was suggesting > > > that the SIMs would be identical. What matters is what I, as a [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > duplicate SIM. It's really not that hard, as long as your phone > switches are linked to your central database. Let me take this for you... Bottom line.. NO GSM system in US has now or plans to setup this kind of database or network... As to your explantion of how it can be done, it does not jive or work with basic GSM operation... Without using switching or phantom numbers... So therefore, it is impossible to have 2 SIMs/Phones on same mobile number on any USA GSM system... Your agrument is like saying it is possible to drive in the Autobahn at 100+ without getting a ticket, so why cant I do that on I-95 or I-10... It aint happening... Yes, it is the same logic that you are using... > > This discussion was never really about "I, as a subscriber, see" It started > > as wanting to have a SIM reactivated, and then into being able to have 2 [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > http://www.o2online.de/o2/kunden/myo2/startseite/multicard/ > Use google or babelfish to translate. See my previous statement.. You arent using O2, you arent using O2 network, you arent using O2 equipment... You arent in Europe... > > Bottom line, as someone else explained.. You aren't on O2... If you are in > > USA... And it isnt just TMobile, ATTWS and Cingular, even Nextel's GSM [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > was insufficient. You didn't say that nobody wanted it. You said it > couldn't be done. It is being done. It was said that both were issue... That USA GSM networks do not permit it, and the ROI was not feasible at this time... BTW ROI is higher for carrier to have 2 seperate mobile numbers payign bills then on account using 2 phones on same mobile number... So hmmm.. I wonder what one of reasons the carriers in US wont/dont support multiple phones on acct... > Also, Nextel isn't GSM, it's iDen. They've been using GSM-standard > SIMs in some of their phones so you can roam internationally, and they > even have an iDen/GSM dual standard phone. But they're not GSM. Nextel DOES use GSM in barious parts of the country... If a Nextel subscriber has a dual band iDEN/GSM handset, they can in certain areas... > > > The cellular network knows about my SIM card based on a secret key > > > that it stores. This secret key is linked to my phone number in their [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > my phone number is not a part of that information exchange - the GSM > network can talk to my phone independant of my phone's actual number. You are incorrect... GSM uses algorithm in the SIM card only... The phone is merely a processor that responds and works with the algorithm from the SIM.. there are no algorithms for crytpo in network as you challenged.. netowrk only has the enctryption methods for talking to my phone then your phone, then the next.. the netowrk responds the same way to all... one at time.... The "low level" is the relavent issue.. read the excerpt someone posted... Once the handset is connected (registered) there is very little that happens as far as network other then passing your call to and from phone... It doesnt reverify unless you have broken registration... GSM pones consitantly talk to the network to keep registered... Basic GSM... > > It responds to a query from the network and looks for and > > recognizes the specific response from the SIM. The code sent is not a [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > in, it looks up which SIM is associated with my phone number, and > tells that SIM to start ringing. No it doesnt... It only reads SIM card to register you in network... If it doesnt find you (the network has a system setting called "Mobile Not reachable" which turns on when not registered and kicks into fall over to Vm or alt forwarding...) it then checks for where you want the call forwarded, if at all > Let me try to explain this simply: > At the interface between the cellular system and the PSTN, an incoming [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > The GSM network then talks to the SIM/phone, and tells it to ring. > If it answers, then it establishes a voice channel and you talk. You have no undrestandiung obviously of GSM... GSM is more like a Wireless LAN.. when you are registered, you are registered.. system doenst give hoot and holler about "looking for you", it already know if and where you are in system... Only if and when it finds the "mobile not reachable" status, does it check database... > Now, _why_ can't it have a list of two or three SIMs there? It tries > to communicate with the first one. If it's not in range, for example, > then it goes back and tries to communicate with the second one? On my > phone, I can dial a special number which tells the system to change > the order it checks the SIMs, say. Continuing my previosu example, it is liek a wireless network... in fact it truuly is, but Im referring to what most people understand as a network... YOu are a station on that network, with an adress in the system once you are registered.. like turning on the PC in the bedroom on your home network... It gets a different address then my wirelss laptop in living room My ISP can see and assigns those thru my router... I cant log in and have both registred on same address... Basically the GSM network is like your home network router... > The way I just described that would involve two fully standard, normal > SIMs, and one single incoming phone number, no special phantom [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > explain how somebody who didn't understand database or communications > technology would expect some strange stupid thing to happen. Bottom line, as previously mentioned.. It is impossible because US system does not use the switching to do so... therefore it is impossible to use such function.. period... It is like asking dealer to put a rear deck wing on top of tailboard of dump truck... Sure it might make sense on some level, but it woudl have no pratical function on a dump truck based on weight, speed, etc.. .or like putting it on a Yugo... or a Crown Victoria... > > GSM is not "Cellular"... Technically it is an entire different method of > > using duplex communication... Properly referred to as PCS. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > If you're going to be pedantic, please try to be correct. Calling GSM cellular in the sense you are is like saying AM is same as FM cause tehy are both radio Cellular communication is different then cellular structure... Cellular communications as in "Cellular phones" is at different frequency, and different modulation process then GSM.... Like FM radio in your stereo is to AM radio... > > Sperate numbers for "fax" or "data" are not specically seperate numbers. To > > the user it is... but only for the designated feature.. If it was a true [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Does this mean that those people don't have "real" phone numbers? Of > course not. That is why it is called a switching network.. Your example is not based in reality... The PSTN decides how much switch capacity it needs to serve NORMAL or expected Surge needs in a given area, and installs that amount of switches... When I dial my landline, I request the use of the switches... and if they are available on both ends, we connect... Hmm, hey wait a minute... Sort of like using your mobile phone... each site has max amount of capacity of calls... etc etc... > Have you ever done conference calling using a GSM phone? Multiple > people can call my single phone number, all at the same time. I can > switch between different people, and I can also combine mutliple > people into a single call. I can do this on the fly, without needing > to arrange this in advance. Sure, cause tahts is done in the switch and network, requested by your handset.. that si why you get charged for minutes on both connected calls when you conference... > For example: > Alice calls me. I am speaking to her. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > _multiple_ concurrent incoming calls. The limitation is that there can > only be one active voice channel between my handset and the network. Ity isnt your phone, it is the network.. it wont as you say support mor ethen one voice channel.. it connects at that level to allow mulitple converstasions.. again ahs nothing to do with SIM or handset, so in regards to discussion has been ongoing, is like saying why cant you make lemonade with apples... > I hope I've made it abundantly clear at this point that it's wrong to > equate "real number" with concurrently usable number. We're long past > the days of physical rotary devices connecting our calls There are still many areas of the country that do still use rotary switches... heck the last crank and switchboard system only was updated in US about 2 years ago... > > USA, they do still use sperate fax numbers... But they route the calls to > > the fax/voicemail system. It doesnt have anything to do with the SIM or the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > in to my phone, I could type "ATA" and answer the call, and then they > would hear the modem handshaking tones. Again, It doesn matter what happended in Kuwait, or France, or Germany... We are talking USA based GSM systems... > > > Why does this incoming number have to always map to the same SIM card? > > > I can call T-Mobile and swap the SIM cards for my account manually. Is [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > economically viable for a US carrier. Your original statement was > incorrect. If it isnt installed, or the provider chooses not to install the system to switch as youd prefer, it makes it no more possible... If you cant do it with what you have, it is impossible... For the TMobile network itself it may be "possible" to set it up, but to the end user with handset it is impossible... > > > If the customer doesn't know the second number, and people reach the > > > second number by dialling the first number, does a mime in a forest > > > care? You said it couldn't be done. It is being done. The existence of > > > some super-secret invisible phone number that nobody sees is, > > > honestly, irrelevant. > > The original statement was regarding having 2 SIMs on the same number, not 2 > > numbers on the same SIM. I understood that was the gist, and from what I > > have read and heard, it is GSM fact, not newsgroup fantasy... > > "newsgroup fantasy" is people claiming something's impossible because > they don't know how it could be done. I love your definition of impossible... >Nextel DOES use GSM in barious parts of the country... If a Nextel >subscriber has a dual band iDEN/GSM handset, they can in certain >areas... And just *where* does Nextel use GSM technology in the US? iDen/GSM handsets do not work in this country. iDen/GSM handsets allow iDen/Nextel users to use networks in non North American countries. It does not support GSM 1900. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply > So therefore, it is impossible to have 2 SIMs/Phones on same mobile > number on any USA GSM system... I agree. Did I ever suggest otherwise? I brought up O2 in Germany when you claimed that no GSM system anywhere in the world could permit this. > Your agrument is like saying it is possible to drive in the Autobahn > at 100+ without getting a ticket, so why cant I do that on I-95 or > I-10... No. That is not what I have said at all. You claimed something was NOT POSSIBLE based on how GSM works. You were provably wrong. I NEVER said that it could be done in the US, or that US carriers should or would offer it. I would really appreciate it if you would stop putting words in my mouth and pretending I said things I didn't say. > See my previous statement.. You arent using O2, you arent using O2 > network, you arent using O2 equipment... You arent in Europe... Actually, right now I am :) But, again, you said it was IMPOSSIBLE on a GSM system. The fact that it is being offered means you were wrong. > > You said the GSM system did not permit it. You didn't say that the ROI > > was insufficient. You didn't say that nobody wanted it. You said it > > couldn't be done. It is being done. > It was said that both were issue... That USA GSM networks do not > permit it, and the ROI was not feasible at this time... You only brought up practicality and ROI when you were proven wrong. We were talking about the GSM system and its protocols, not carrier economics. > BTW ROI is higher for carrier to have 2 seperate mobile numbers payign > bills then on account using 2 phones on same mobile number... So > hmmm.. I wonder what one of reasons the carriers in US wont/dont > support multiple phones on acct... If it's not cost effective why do carriers in other countries offer it? Clearly they think it's worth the investment. > > Also, Nextel isn't GSM, it's iDen. They've been using GSM-standard > > SIMs in some of their phones so you can roam internationally, and they > > even have an iDen/GSM dual standard phone. But they're not GSM. > Nextel DOES use GSM in barious parts of the country... If a Nextel > subscriber has a dual band iDEN/GSM handset, they can in certain > areas... A fascinating claim. The Motorola i2000plus is their dual mode iDen/GSM handset. It only works on GSM 900. There aren't any GSM 900 networks in the US. http://www.nextel.com/support/faq/worldwidefaq.shtml Sorry, but you're wrong. Feel free to show me an iDen phone that does GSM 850 or 1900, as well as a Nextel map showing their coverage if you feel I'm wrong. > > > > The cellular network knows about my SIM card based on a secret key > > > > that it stores. This secret key is linked to my phone number in their [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > my phone then your phone, then the next.. the netowrk responds the > same way to all... one at time.... I'm attempting to parse your English but I'm having difficulty here. Given that the network sends encrypted traffic to my phone, there obviously has to be a cryptographic algorithm outside of my phone. It's rather difficult to convert plaintext to ciphertext without an encryption algorithm... > The "low level" is the relavent issue.. read the excerpt someone > posted... I did. I understood it. I am reasonably well versed with public key cryptography. You have totally failed to understand what I've explained. The low level details you described were absolutely irrelevant to this discussion. Should I start talking about the types of silicon in the transistors in a phone, and the relative merits of functional vs. imperative programming languages in cellular network switch designs? I think Ericsson's use of the functional programming language Erlang is very relevant to this, don't you? The lack of side effects in a purely functional language makes it much simpler to debug multi-threaded concurrent code. > > > It responds to a query from the network and looks for and > > > recognizes the specific response from the SIM. The code sent is not a [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > over to Vm or alt forwarding...) it then checks for where you want the > call forwarded, if at all Let's try to break this down in to steps: 1. PSTN indicates to GSM network that a phone call for phone number 12345 is incoming 2. GSM network somehow figures out which phone must be told of this information and start ringing 3. GSM network sends a message to the phone and the phone starts ringing. Which of those steps am I mis-understanding? > > Let me try to explain this simply: > > At the interface between the cellular system and the PSTN, an incoming [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > You have no undrestandiung obviously of GSM... You don't know what the term "celular phone" means. You repeatedly claim things are impossible when they are in fact readily available commercial services. You aren't really demonstrating a lot of knowledge here. > > Now, _why_ can't it have a list of two or three SIMs there? It tries > > to communicate with the first one. If it's not in range, for example, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Basically the GSM network is like your home network router... An excellent analogy. That is precisely how I understood it to be. Do you know how the DNS system works? What an IP address is, and how they relate? On a computer network, you enter a name, and it figures out which IP address to connect to so that it can reach the computer with that name. You can change the name whenever you want for whatever reason. With the phone network, it's the same. My GSM handset doesn't communicate to the network using its phone number, but rather using various numbers derived from the SIM and IMEI. Thus, every time somebody tries to call my phone number, the GSM network can make my phone number resolve to a different phone number. Just like a computer network, right? > > The way I just described that would involve two fully standard, normal > > SIMs, and one single incoming phone number, no special phantom [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > system does not use the switching to do so... therefore it is > impossible to use such function.. period... Bzzt. False. It is _not_being_done_now_by_a_US_carrier_. Do you understand the difference between "not being done in this market" and "not possible"? > > GSM is a form of cellular, and AMPS is a form of cellular. The term > > celllular refers to the cells that are used, and, if I'm not mistaken, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Like FM radio in your stereo is to AM radio... I know what you are claiming. You are _incorrect_. http://www.gsmworld.com/technology/glossary.shtml RTFM. You are under the mistaken impression that "Cellular phones" means only AMPS. GSM is a standard for cellular phones. AMPS is a standard for cellular phones. IS-95 CDMA is a standard for cellular phones. You claim to be a cellullar engineer, yet you disagree with the IEC and the GSM Association, among others, over what the term "cellular phones" means? I'm a ham radio operator. I've built my own radio gear. I'm building an SDR-based radio receiver right now. I do have a clue about this stuff. > > Interesting. That's not how it works in most normal GSM systems. Back > > in the mid 1990s when I was doing a lot of CSD on a 900MHz GSM system [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > We are talking USA based GSM systems... *sigh* This is getting tedious. You keep saying that GSM doesn't allow this, GSM doesn't let you do that. I'm talking about the GSM standard. You claimed that an incoming fax number isn't a real number in GSM. It is. Just because there exists one provider in the US who gives you fake fax numbers doesn't mean that GSM doesn't let you have real incoming faxing and data calls. > > Irrelevant. You said it wasn't possible, not that it wasn't > > economically viable for a US carrier. Your original statement was [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > If you cant do it with what you have, it is impossible... Let's get some basic English language clear here. When you say simply "Doing <foo> is impossible" you are making a global claim that it is never possible. You previously said: > It is basic GSM... NO GSM > system will allow 2 SIMS to be active on same account anywhere in > world. ...and you were WRONG. > For the TMobile network itself it may be "possible" to set it up, but > to the end user with handset it is impossible... Then stop saying things like "NO GSM system" allows it. > > So therefore, it is impossible to have 2 SIMs/Phones on same mobile > > number on any USA GSM system... [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > You claimed something was NOT POSSIBLE based on how GSM works. You > were provably wrong. Showing or stating that apples can grow in Alaska has no connection to whether or not apples can grow in Alabama... This whole sub thread was US systems... TMobile USA... Not Europe, not Kuwait, not the Moom > I NEVER said that it could be done in the US, or that US carriers > should or would offer it. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Actually, right now I am :) Well as far as your service goes, if you have TMobile USA, and are using it in Europe, you still do not have access to the full netowrk potential... So still, I belive the word was irrelavnt > But, again, you said it was IMPOSSIBLE on a GSM system. The fact that > it is being offered means you were wrong. Again the discussion was TMobile USA... not what O2 or some other carrier in some other country was doing.. .(checks the group name, yup) > > > You said the GSM system did not permit it. You didn't say that the ROI > > > was insufficient. You didn't say that nobody wanted it. You said it [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > We were talking about the GSM system and its protocols, not carrier > economics. It does have to do with GSM, its protocols, AND carrier economics > > BTW ROI is higher for carrier to have 2 seperate mobile numbers payign > > bills then on account using 2 phones on same mobile number... So [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > If it's not cost effective why do carriers in other countries offer > it? Clearly they think it's worth the investment. They dont offer it for free... And they offer many different things or services... Lets see most carriers supposedly charge you extra to call a mobile or handy... rate structure in general is different as to who pays for calls... That is there decision... DIfferent markets, different economics... > > > Also, Nextel isn't GSM, it's iDen. They've been using GSM-standard > > > SIMs in some of their phones so you can roam internationally, and they [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > GSM 850 or 1900, as well as a Nextel map showing their coverage if you > feel I'm wrong. That was what I too was told, but never personally confirmed... > > The "low level" is the relavent issue.. read the excerpt someone > > posted... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > functional language makes it much simpler to debug multi-threaded > concurrent code. Those details were from the an industry reference... not made up.. I checked with friend who has the book, I now have a photo copy of sections here in frtont of me... So you are wiser then someone who works directly in the field of GSM and wrote a training and reference manual for engineers and others? BTW ... Just so no one can say "right some BS" http://www.cordero2.com/GSM.htm > > > > It responds to a query from the network and looks for and > > > > recognizes the specific response from the SIM. The code sent is not a [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Which of those steps am I mis-understanding? The previosu poster already answered that... number 2 doesnt exist... when the variosu system registers show where your phone is in the network, it switches it to the handset... The system already knows where and what handset to ring... > > > Let me try to explain this simply: > > > At the interface between the cellular system and the PSTN, an incoming [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > commercial services. You aren't really demonstrating a lot of > knowledge here. > > > Now, _why_ can't it have a list of two or three SIMs there? It tries > > > to communicate with the first one. If it's not in range, for example, [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > You can change the name whenever you want for whatever reason. > With the phone network, it's the same. My GSM handset doesn't > communicate to the network using its phone number, but rather using > various numbers derived from the SIM and IMEI. > Thus, every time somebody tries to call my phone number, the GSM > network can make my phone number resolve to a different phone number. > Just like a computer network, right? As long as you are registered in network, you have same live address.. when you change sites etc, your registration stays teh same.. thru basic handoff issues, the registers follow you from site to site... you dont chaneg number or system registartion, just the file as to where you are regsitered > > > The way I just described that would involve two fully standard, normal > > > SIMs, and one single incoming phone number, no special phantom [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > understand the difference between "not being done in this market" and > "not possible"? If it is not being done by any US carrier, and you use a us carrier, then it is not possible ... AT THIS TIME... > You claim to be a cellullar engineer <snip> No one claimed to be an engineer... and just for the record, GSM in teh US is regualted as far as standard by the North American GSM Alliance. > I'm a ham radio operator. I've built my own radio gear. I'm building > an SDR-based radio receiver right now. I do have a clue about this > stuff. I to am an active amateur radio operator... I have been involved with radio for approximately 45 years, including QRP, full morse, EME, and packet... I am also a former military satellite and communications technician... So lets just put your penis back inside of bragging sizes... > > > Interesting. That's not how it works in most normal GSM systems. Back > > > in the mid 1990s when I was doing a lot of CSD on a 900MHz GSM system [quoted tex |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message