FPL server restricts UA type?

[yxie]

With FPL soft client, I can register FPL server with my account and make/receive calls. However with any other user agents (e.g. Linksys PAP2, Counterpath X-lite etc.), the FPL always replys "200 Auth Failed" for the register message. Thus FPL server complains "your password is not valid" whenever I try to make an outgoing call.

The Register message sent by PAP2 or X-lite looks ok, but FPL sends a funny reply "200 Auth Failed". As per RFC, if FPL server rejects the Register message, it should reply 403 or 404. But "200 Autu Failed" is returned instead. Did FPL team modify the SIP stack in the Sip EXpress router (0.9.6 (i386/freebsd)) in order to do that?

Although the Register message is correct, but it seems FPL server knows what type of UA is registering, and fails the US it doesn't like. Of course, the User-Agent can be found in the message header, like

User-Agent: FreePhoneLine 2.2.0.0

User-Agent: X-Lite release 1011s stamp 41150

However FPL sells so-called Configuration file at $50, which just contains instructions for a few settings. Even if users knows how to configure their device, they have to BUY (at $50!) for this useless file. Otherwise FPL won't allow you using non-FPL UA. Auctually what FPL does is to change the database to allow non-FPL UA to register, if you pay the $50. Why does FPL charge customer with the excuse of a "configuration" file? As customers, we understand something now, we hope to konw the truth.

As a voip software engineer, I wouldn't like to hear somebody here told me that I made wrong settings in my UA or router for the "200 Auth Failed"

[Jake]

With FPL soft client, I can register FPL server with my account and make/receive calls. However with any other user agents (e.g. Linksys PAP2, Counterpath X-lite etc.), the FPL always replys "200 Auth Failed" for the register message. Thus FPL server complains "your password is not valid" whenever I try to make an outgoing call.

The Register message sent by PAP2 or X-lite looks ok, but FPL sends a funny reply "200 Auth Failed". As per RFC, if FPL server rejects the Register message, it should reply 403 or 404. But "200 Autu Failed" is returned instead. Did FPL team modify the SIP stack in the Sip EXpress router (0.9.6 (i386/freebsd)) in order to do that?

Although the Register message is correct, but it seems FPL server knows what type of UA is registering, and fails the US it doesn't like. Of course, the User-Agent can be found in the message header, like

User-Agent: FreePhoneLine 2.2.0.0

User-Agent: X-Lite release 1011s stamp 41150

However FPL sells so-called Configuration file at $50, which just contains instructions for a few settings. Even if users knows how to configure their device, they have to BUY (at $50!) for this useless file. Otherwise FPL won't allow you using non-FPL UA. Auctually what FPL does is to change the database to allow non-FPL UA to register, if you pay the $50. Why does FPL charge customer with the excuse of a "configuration" file? As customers, we understand something now, we hope to konw the truth.

As a voip software engineer, I wouldn't like to hear somebody here told me that I made wrong settings in my UA or router for the "200 Auth Failed"

Have you paid for the file? They call it a file, but it really is just them setting up your account to work with your own ATA. But as I see it, they have to make money somewhere for setting these things up, and $50 is not so bad. Anyway, if you don't pay the $50, your details won't work and you will probably get a failed message.

If it was as simple as them filtering the UA, wouldn't it be just as simple to spoof the UA? The password I initially set up is not the same as the one for my account. So I expect they have changed my account somehow.

The only truth people really need to know is FPL offers a really good product, and for $50 you can axe your landline and save that every month. Yes you have to pay $50 to use their system as you want to, but if you don't want to pay the money, then you can just use the softphone. Either way, FPL is a good company IMO.

[FONGO_steve]

Jake hit the nail on the head - I don't think our response is needed here