[VoIP] Returning CNET numbers

[Dennis D Hock]

Pete,

No problem, I think we are all interested in different ways to do it.  I
think Greg aklready has a method in moind to allow an automated sign up so
maybe he needs to know all the blocks for that system he is implementing.
Not sure.

Dennis

-----voip-bounces at ckts.info wrote: -----


To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
From: Peter Duffield <pd at pd1.org.uk>
Sent by: voip-bounces at ckts.info
Date: 11/17/2007 02:25PM
Subject: Re: [VoIP] Returning CNET numbers

Dennis/John

I don't really wish to interfere in something that doesn't affect us here
in
the UK, but might it not be an idea if you amended the reserve list to show
only the block(s) you are keeping.  This will indicate to others that the
ones
you aren't using are available and Greg can change the routing as and when
required rather than hit him with a lot of changes all at once.

Peter


On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 13:16:34 -0500, Dennis D Hock <hockd at dteenergy.com>
wrote:

>
>Lee,
>
>In the document just issued it indicates in the fifth paragraph, if I
>counted correctly, that "Existing collectors will be grandfathered with
the
>old system of 10,000 number assignments but will be asked to donate back
to
>the pool any blocks they are actively using."
>
>I think as in Johns xcase there are several of us , myself included just
>wanting to make sure Greg and or whoever is ready to receive these back
>into the pool.  Recall in the following paragraph it referecnces a sign up
>for numbers when you are ready by merely accessing the web site to see
what
>blocks are available.  I have parapharsed the paragragh here so you might
>want to read it in its entirety.  I think we just want to make sure that
we
>are ready to display these numbers to others looking to sign up for a
block
>of numbers.
>
>Hope that helps some.
>
>Dennis Hock
>
>-----voip-bounces at ckts.info wrote: -----
>
>
>To: "'Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches'" <voip at ckts.info>
>From: "Lee Spenadel" <lee at spenadel.com>
>Sent by: voip-bounces at ckts.info
>Date: 11/17/2007 12:16PM
>Subject: Re: [VoIP] Returning CNET numbers
>
>Aren't existing allocations Grand Fathered?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: voip-bounces at ckts.info [mailto:voip-bounces at ckts.info] On Behalf Of
>john jones
>Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 11:21 AM
>To: voip at ckts.info
>Subject: [VoIP] Returning CNET numbers
>
>Greg,
>
>Are you ready for people to start turning back numbers or should that
>process be delayed a bit until any necessary system changes are made?
>
>
>I currently have all of 688 and only need 688-8xxx
>
>
>Thanks!
>
>John
>
>_______________________________________________
>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/

_______________________________________________
VoIP mailing list
VoIP at ckts.info
http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/