[VoIP] Number portability in CNET

[Steph Kerman]

Dennis, that's what I thought.  That's why I asked the question.  The 
answer seemed to suggest otherwise: .
> Whether the call is forwarded by redirect or by tandem switching of 
> course depends on the architecture of the two involved offices.
Steph

Dennis D Hock wrote:
> Steph,
>
> I was under the impression with my limited education on this that all that
> was being redirected was the address duroing the initial setup.  It would
> not be quite like legacy tandeming.  Once the request was recognized to no
> longer be within the far end * box, it would send the new location of that
> number back and the first * box would then simply redirect to that tandem.
> I would'nt see any additional delay per see as long as they redirecting
> party was not trying to perform legacy tandeming.
>
> Greg / Shane am I correct in this assumption?
>
> Dennis H.
>
> -----voip-bounces at ckts.info wrote: -----
>
>
> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
> From: Steph Kerman <stfkerman at jps.net>
> Sent by: voip-bounces at ckts.info
> Date: 10/27/2007 12:52PM
> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Number portability in CNET
>
>
> David Josephson wrote:
>   
>> As with most software-defined realities, we can do any or all of those
>> things. The whole 7-digit dialed number is part of the ENUM query, so
>> Greg's server could indeed look up each individual number, or look for
>> ranges of numbers.
>> I should have written more of a preface. I was responding to the
>> latest round about office code hoarding.
>>     
> It would be interesting to see an inventory of how many office codes
> have been taken, how many of those have been activated and how many are
> open.  It sounds like the whole topic is not a real concern for the
> foreseeable future considering the ease with which the existing ENUM
> structure supports sharing with very high flexibility in the block size.
>   
>> Since this topic comes up tiresomely often, implying that someone
>> would like one of the office codes that someone else is sitting on, we
>> could reach a consensus that we'd ask Greg to carve out some of the
>> office code in the ENUM table, if the original assignee of that office
>> code was not using it, and/or unable to forward a desired number to
>> someone who *would* use it.
>>     
> Here's where you lose me.  I don't understand the distinction you are
> making between carving out a block or individual number in ENUM and the
> original assignee "forwarding" it.
>   
>> Whether the call is forwarded by redirect or by tandem switching of
>> course depends on the architecture of the two involved offices.
>>     
> I understood Shane to be saying that redirection occurred through ENUM.
> What mechanism exists for a call to be forwarded by redirection other
> than through ENUM?  Tandem switching seems likely to increase the delay
> to an intolerable point.  I don't see how it can not introduce
> noticeable unnecessary impairment even if some might consider the total
> delay acceptable.  Has anyone experimented with tandem switching through
> CNET to see what the calls sound like?
>
> Steph
>   
>> David Josephson
>>     
>>> How does this fit in with David's comment?
>>>
>>> If the full 7-digit number is looked up in ENUM for each call to
>>> allow sharing of office codes doesn't that require ENUM to be updated
>>> for all new line assignments at local switches? I thought only the
>>> 3-digit office code was being looked up and that there was discussion
>>> about extending this to the thousands digit to allow sharing of
>>> office codes in blocks of 1000 numbers, but that it had not been done.
>>>
>>> Steph
>>>
>>> Shane Young wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> There is no need to do either.
>>>>
>>>> Since we always lookup every number in DNS via ENUM, greg just
>>>> points the "ported" number to the new destination.
>>>>
>>>> It's a lot like the way real LNP works.
>>>> --Shane
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Quoting Steph Kerman <stfkerman at jps.net>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Send by redirecting at the originating point or send by tandeming
>>>>> through your system?
>>>>>
>>>>> Steph
>>>>>
>>>>> David Josephson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>>> I think that anyone who has an office code should be able to
>>>>>> provide routing to other CNET numbers, should anyone else have a
>>>>>> desire for a
>>>>>>             
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>