[VoIP] [ATCA] The Government is Your Friend

[Chad Perkins]

On 27 Oct 2007 at 10:25, Greg Blakely wrote:
:
> To my way of thinking, if a person is fairly active on the mailing
> list, they are showing the intention of getting their systems set up
> and online.  In a case like that, a 6-month rule would seem to be a
> bit of an over-reach.
> 
> For those who register, and then disappear off the face of the earth,
> a 6-month rule would seem to be a valid timeframe.
> 
> By "disappearing", I'd like to think that we'd give at least a token
> effort to find the person who reserved the codes.  By that, I  mean
> that, if they post regularly to other telecom-related lists (TCI,
> ATCA, Srowger, Etc), one of us who also haunt those lists would step
> forward and say, "Yep.  I know old Joe Doakes.  He has every intention
> of getting online as soon as John Novack finishes building him an
> asterisk box."
> 
> Why would we want to go to that much trouble?  To avoid hard feelings,
> as much as possible.  

I believe this issue was "resolved" once before; check the archives.
 
: 
> Okay, the rest of this message pertains only to the North American
> switchers, so you UK folks can quit reading, since it'd be the kind of
> stuff to glaze your eyes.
> 
> As to X11 and X00, that is a good discussion; and one I think needs to
> be held.

The original messages on this thread didn't get to every one on the list .. don't know 
what this was in reference to ...
 
> One of us has already taken 700, in order that he can provide the long
> distance carrier welcome message.  And that's not a big deal.  There's
> not much else that's done on that NPA, since 700 is specific to each
> individual LD carrier, and has historically been a way for the LD
> carriers to grab the intralata traffic, back before an LPIC was
> possible in most class 5 switches.

That'd be me.  I have run into a number of situations we I grabbed an outside line 
and things did do what I expected.  I dial 700-4141 or 1-700-555-4141 to check the 
carrier that the access code I dialed mapped to.  I've found that a frustrating number 
of CLEC/VoIP providers don't honor the numbers for "presubscription verification".  
We decided we could do something about it that for CNET so we did.  

The 700 CNET office code started out implemented just as it is the NANP (IntraLATA 
Presubscription Verification).  With research I found that office code 700 actually has 
been issued in a couple area codes.  Test numbers from area code 818 were added.

The 700 office code has a separate ENUM entry so I can move it to another (OC-
1/high bandwidth) location.  It has been my hope to use this as a foundation for 
scalable conferencing and individual ATA hosting platform in addition to original 
functions.  Hosting individual ATA members seemed like a good use of an otherwise 
wasted/poor office code.  Rick Miller was the first with which we went through two 
configurations (SIP ATA and later IAX2 trunk via a Tribox he built before it crashed 
and he "disappeared").  I've got Jeff Webber founder of Island Telephone Company 
and Telephone Museum member hosted on a PAP2 that we fight with constantly to 
keep running.  Enough about my problems.

:
> That brings about the whole NPA can of worms.  There are some of us
> who use our asterisk box for our main phone system, and, so we assign
> NPA 200 to CNET, and that makes life easy for us.
> 
> Others of us dial 9 for a PSTN line, and 8 to access CNET.
> 
> So, some of us would have issues if we went to 10-digit dialing within
> country code 1, and others would not.

There are pros and cons both ways; some day we'll probably need to take another 
straw poll.
 
> I'd bet that Chad Perkins, who hold the 700 office code now, would
> think it to be more true-to-life if we were to implement 10-digit
> dialing, so that his "welcome to CNET" recording would happen on
> 700-555-4141. (Although I haven't asked him...)

Yes and no.  700-4141 is Intra-LATA and 700-555-4141 is Inter-LATA.  CNET today 
is in effect one "LATA" (so we have intra but not inter).  If CNET were +1 10 Digits 
(for North America) there would be a "place" for both.

:
> WHAT IF....
> What if we were to decide to pattern ourselves after the original
> design of the NANP, declaring that the middle digit of an NPA be
> either a 1 or a 0, and that office codes cannot use a 1 or a 0 as
> their middle digit.
> 
> IF WE DID THAT...
> If we did that, we could have our asterisk boxes set to dial ten
> digits if the second digit is a one or a zero, and dial only seven
> digits if otherwise.  That might make it convenient for both those of
> us who want to use 7-digit codes and those who want ten digit dialing.

7D digit dial would be intra LATA ?
 
> OKAY..  All that said, here is my LAST opinion of the day (finally...
> Whew!)
 
> I believe that X11 should be internal to each individual switch,
:
> Anyone else care to disagree with all or part?

I see no advantage of implementing X11 codes in CNET.  If someone has a great 
idea for one I'd suggest they start a new thread on the topic and try and "sell it" to the 
group and see where it goes.
 
Chad