<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">

	<channel>

	<title>&#45; CircleID</title>
	<link>https://www.circleid.com/blogs/</link>
	<description>Postings from  on CircleID</description>
	<dc:language>en</dc:language>
	<dc:rights>Copyright 2026, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
	<dc:date>2026-03-31T21:29:00+00:00</dc:date>

	
	<item>
		<title> Phone Always Busy? Must be DDoS on VoIP Network (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/postsphone_always_busy_must_be_ddos_on_voip_network</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/postsphone_always_busy_must_be_ddos_on_voip_network</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Amidst the fascinating news from the SCO saga, preparing for SANS London and contributing to the Unix timeline project at Grokline my eyes caught a piece of rather distressing news on the BBC. It appears that BT (British Telecom) intends to move its current phone network to an IP-based network by 2009 thereby sending the circuit-switched technology off to the attic. The real question is: can we guarantee the same level of reliability on VoIP as we had on circuit-switched telephony when the stated aim is to carry both voice and data traffic down the same cables (or fibres more likely)? <a href="https://circleid.com/postsphone_always_busy_must_be_ddos_on_voip_network">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	

	</channel>
</rss>