Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Caller ID Made Simple

rdegges.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 66 posts

Re: Caller ID Made Simple

#51

Post by mikeknoop »

premchai21 wrote: post #18
mikeknoop wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might make this more obvious. Also, you might state how to distinguish between "sorry we need more time to look this up" and an actual 404 or error. HTTP code 202 Accepted seems appropriate for this ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HTTP_status_codes )

504 Gateway Timeout would be the obvious one, since if I'm reading this correctly it's essentially a timeout of zero; 5xx status codes are indicative of retriability later on. But I think that sort of performance would make the free tier essentially worthless. “All you have to do is hit our API endpoint, and BAM, you get results back.” Except you really don't. Analogy: a caching DNS resolver that returned an instant…

I guess I disagree here (but who doesn't with HTTP status codes...). I try to reserve 5XX codes for actual errors. In this case, no error occurred, the response is just delayed.

Re: Caller ID Made Simple

#52

Post by a3_nm »

mwally wrote: post #13
mikeknoop wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My thoughts exactly! I easily get less than 60 calls per hour so this would be perfect. Interestingly, the caller ID for my number is tied to the first owner of my account before it was transferred to me (which happened many years ago).

An Android app is currently in development, and will be released free of charge. We are having an issue, however, because non-GSM carriers rarely allow data transmissions during a voice call, including the ringing state of incoming calls.

Please make it open source as well as free of charge! It could be a useful example to extend.

Re: Caller ID Made Simple

#53

Post by odiroot »

lisper wrote: post #46
b14ck wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey Adley, thanks for the comment! I'll update the page shortly.

When I tried it I got this: "Sorry, not implemented yet. Please append "?format=json" to your URL." When I did that it worked.

It must be Tastypie thingy. Nice to see Django-powered site.

Re: Caller ID Made Simple

#55

Post by narcissus »

inghoff wrote: post #23
steveh73 wrote: post #10

Please make it more obvious that this only works for US phone numbers

I just tried it for some numbers around Montreal. Apart from the delayed results issue, it works.

I just tried my home number and the name it came up with was 'Nova Scotia'. My landline provider is based in Halifax, but I'm in PEI. I'm kind of used to that, though :)

Re: Caller ID Made Simple

#57

Post by joshaidan »

For what it's worth, and for all those asking questions about Canadian numbers, caller id name is handled differently in Canada than in the states. When a carrier sends an outgoing call, they include the caller id name in the SS7 IAM (Initial Message), unlike the states where the receiving carrier has to do a database lookup on the number to retrieve the name. This likely explains why a lot of Canadian numbers are not returning any results, or incorrect results.

Personally, I think the Canadian system of including the name in the IAM works a lot better than having to do a DB lookup.

Re: Caller ID Made Simple

#58

Post by daralthus »

paxswill wrote: post #45
tjoff wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I've often used my mobile internet at the same time as talking in the phone (although it fails sometimes (and I don't have LTE)). Also, there are many applications in the market that does exactly this. I haven't installed any of them since I basically don't trust anyone with "read/write contacts" and "full internet access" at the same time (perfectly valid permissions for apps like this, but that doesn't mean I…

It's only an issue for non-GSM phones i.e. CDMA phones used in the US and parts of Asia. CDMA does not allow data and voice to run at once over the same radio, while GSM does. Since LTE is an entirely IP network, voice can be run over it like any other IP network. Current phones/carriers do not support it though, but there's some talk that it will be introduced in the next year or so.

Can anybody tell me more about the cdma and gsm usage ratio in the US?

Re: Caller ID Made Simple

#60

Post by drivebyacct2 »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #21
mwally wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An Android app is currently in development, and will be released free of charge. We are having an issue, however, because non-GSM carriers rarely allow data transmissions during a voice call, including the ringing state of incoming calls.

Without Voice-over-LTE, I'm not sure how you're going to get around it. It's not a carrier limitation, it's a limitation of CDMA radios and implementations.

Seriously? Three people went through and mass downvoted my posts in this thread? Why? Why-oh-why?
Post reply on HN