[VoIP] Office code reservation was Number portability in CNET

[Shane Young]

The technically correct way to do that would be for each switch to  
route 411 (or any n11 call) locally.

I think we are getting a little off track.  The purpose of the ENUM  
service that Greg has is to route calls between switches, not out to  
the network in general.

You'd really want to do that type of stuff locally in your Asterisk dial plan.


Quoting Lee Spenadel <lee at spenadel.com>:

> Why not map 411 through to Goog411?  I have my switch configured for that
> service and would be happy to host it for the group.  I would merely forward
> it out my own 411 configuration.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: voip-bounces at ckts.info [mailto:voip-bounces at ckts.info] On Behalf Of
> Jayson Smith
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 1:22 AM
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Office code reservation was Number portability in CNET
>
> I already have one thought, which echoes one of Greg's. The X11 codes should
>
> not be assignable as office codes at all. E.G. the number 411-1111 should
> not be valid. However, there should be the ability for someone to provide a
> service on a particular X11 code, E.G. 411 directory assistance service.
> Even this should not be possible for 911, which is a very important
> real-world service when it's needed. If anything at all is put on the 911
> code, it should be a 911 failure announcement, which, in my opinion, should
> indicate the following things:
> The phone line is not properly configured to provide 911 service.
> If this is an emergency, the caller should dial 911 from a different
> telephone line. I know that's not very helpful, but a generic message can't
> get much more specific.
> If the caller is conducting a test of their implementation of 911 service,
> the test has failed, and they should fix it.
> This message would be useful for times when someone dials 911 on a system
> which has been mistakenly configured to route 911 as a CNET call.
> Jayson
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg Blakely" <greg at vyger.net>
> To: <jnovack at stromberg-carlson.org>; "Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog
> Switches" <voip at ckts.info>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 10:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Office code reservation was Number portability in CNET
>
>
>> I apologize, guys.  I can see that everyone is fairly concerned about
>> putting their time and energies into a hobby that could fall apart
>> disastrously if a war over unsettled issues erupts.
>>
>> Something you should bear in mind: a new network could be started in
>> competition with this one, so your efforts at making asterisk boxes and
>> embedded asterisk firewalls would not ultimately go to waste.  You could
>> always take your marbles and go join a different game.
>>
>> All that said, I hope that we don't get to that point.  I kinda like all
>> the back and forth we have on the list, and I would miss it if the noise
>> level got too low.
>>
>> I am going to talk with Ian Jolly off-list, and see what it is that they
>> have put in place that keeps the UK switchers from warring over their
>> office codes.  I'm sure that the legacy phone network in Britain evolved
>> over time, so it can't be as cut and dried as it seems.
>>
>> Once I hear from him, I would like to get volunteers to be part of a
>> standards committee.  We could all bring our best ideas, discuss the
>> issues, along with possible solutions, and then present what we come up
>> with to everyone on this list for all of us to vote on.
>>
>> That's the only way I can think of that we can resolve some things
>> without burning up too much time on this mailing list, rehashing the
>> same things over and over.
>>
>> Once we have voted, any policies that we adopt will be added to the
>> ckts.info website.
>>
>> So, if you have a desire to be a part of the standards committee, please
>> drop me an email off-list, and we'll get this critter going in a
>> business-like, yet friendly, fashion.
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: voip-bounces at ckts.info [mailto:voip-bounces at ckts.info]
>>> On Behalf Of John Novack
>>>
>>>
>>> The UK guys are ahead of us in their policy and planning so I
>>> don't consider a discussion out of line.
>>>
>>> By having a few policies in place we certainly don't destroy
>>> the informal nature of it all.
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoIP mailing list
>> VoIP at ckts.info
>> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
>> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>>
> _______________________________________________
> VoIP mailing list
> VoIP at ckts.info
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoIP mailing list
> VoIP at ckts.info
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>

--Shane
+1-821-7311 CNET

----------------------------------------------------------------