[VoIP] Office code reservation was Number portability in CNET

[Jayson Smith]

Actually, I see 411 being used for internal DA within CNET. I'd love to 
think some day we'd have a voice recog and response system in place to do 
this. Too bad we can't afford offices full of operators for DA, intercept, 
0+ dialing, etc!
Jayson

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lee Spenadel" <lee at spenadel.com>
To: "'Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches'" <voip at ckts.info>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 7:33 AM
Subject: Re: [VoIP] Office code reservation was Number portability in CNET


> 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/