[VoIP] CNET number assignments

[John Novack]

john jones wrote:
> I think we all need to start thinking about number portability on CNET so that we can all stop tying up 10,000 number per office code.   I can predict that many people have reserved codes that mean something to them so giving back the reserved code from one's childhood may be controversial even if there are  no imminent plans to implement something.  So if we could do number assignments in smaller blocks, the concept of reclaiming vacant address blocks could be deferred for a much longer time.
>   
That is already possible, thanks to the smart way Greg has set things up.
Dennis Hock and Chris Mattingly share an office code, ( Chris not 
presently on line ) and Don Weig's 736 office code ( not presently 
working due to the ISP ) has the 736-5XXX block going to Greg.
The way he explained it to me he COULD, with enough entry work into the 
DNS, direct any number in the block anywhere. It simply means a lot of 
work on Greg's part, so until necessary it probably ought not be done.
None of us NEEDS 10000 numbers, but then, as I have said, all of this 
isn't a matter of need..

John Novack

-- 
Dog is my co-pilot