30 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

The Telecom Digest for September 02, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 219 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Dep't of Justice filing suits to stop AT&T takeover of T-Mobile(danny burstein)
Porting number into Comcast(MB)
Re: Porting number into Comcast(fatkinson.remove-this)
Re: Where does digital phone service hand off toll-free calls?(Doug McIntyre)
Re: Disconnected POTS (Cable phone service disrupted from power outage)(hancock4)

====== 30 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Bill Horne and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using any name or email address included herein for any reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to that person, or email address owner.
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of that address. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime.  - Geoffrey Welsh

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest. 




Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 12:00:46 +0000 (UTC)
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Dep't of Justice filing suits to stop AT&T   takeover of T-Mobile
Message-ID: <j3ns5e$n5i$1@reader1.panix.com>

In <1314827797.4050.16.camel@Thinkpad> Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> writes:

>On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 11:12 -0400, danny burstein wrote:
>> [Forbes]
>> 
>> Department Of Justice Files To Block AT&T-T-Mobile Deal, Reports Say

>If the DOJ didn't prevent CenturyLink gobbling up QWEST, they have no
>business objecting to at&t taking over T-Mobile. 

Maybe it took a while to finally get them snapped out
of their previous mindsets and to start doing their jobs?

(Now if only the FCC/FTC would do the same for, as an
example, Rachel of Cardholder Services)

-- 
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
		     dannyb@panix.com 
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]




Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 07:33:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: MB <mattb19020@yahoo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Porting number into Comcast
Message-ID: <c772a45d-44e0-4851-a7e6-3be396c348cb@er4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>

Hi-
I'm trying to port two numbers into Comcast from Vonage,  one being in
the 856-461/RIVERSIDE, NJ, originally a Verizon number, the other one
being 856-735/RIVERTON, NJ, which has always been a Vonage number.

Comcast is stating that they can port over the 856-461 number since
the Riverside, NJ switch in which it resides is my 'home' switch,
which the 856-461 number would be served from if I had Verizon.   They
are stating that they can't port 856-735 since the Riverton, NJ switch
is not in my locale (its 2 towns over, roughly 3 miles away).

Does this make sense to anybody?  They originally said sure we can
port it, however after all is said and done (8 calls later with 15
different reps...not exaggerating), i get a resounding "no".

Thanks
Matt




Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 12:23:19 -0600
From: fatkinson.remove-this@and-this-too.mishmash.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Porting number into Comcast
Message-ID: <12dfc4e61238d2f32c03d34d3f435f15.squirrel@webmail.mishmash.com>

> Hi-
> I'm trying to port two numbers into Comcast from Vonage,  one being in
> the 856-461/RIVERSIDE, NJ, originally a Verizon number, the other one
> being 856-735/RIVERTON, NJ, which has always been a Vonage number.
>
> Comcast is stating that they can port over the 856-461 number since
> the Riverside, NJ switch in which it resides is my 'home' switch,
> which the 856-461 number would be served from if I had Verizon.   They
> are stating that they can't port 856-735 since the Riverton, NJ switch
> is not in my locale (its 2 towns over, roughly 3 miles away).
>
> Does this make sense to anybody?  They originally said sure we can
> port it, however after all is said and done (8 calls later with 15
> different reps...not exaggerating), i get a resounding "no".
>

Matt,

     I wouldn't be the first time a VOIP company has told someone wrong. 
They've told me wrong more than once.

     Ideally, all numbers should be portable.  Most of them are now.  But
some aren't.

     Find out who the carrier is that was assigned that exchange.  Call
that carrier and ask them if the number can be ported.  They are you
best source of information.

     For example, when I moved to Las Cruces, I set up a local number to a
QWEST voice mail account.  QWEST confirmed it is portable.

     I've ported it three times since I moved here.  I ported it to who
was my current VOIP provider in Georgia when I moved to New Mexico. 
The quality of their support deteriorated and I got another one on a
two year contract.  They support failed me when I needed it.  I broke
contract two months early because they couldn't fix the problem (yes,
I got credit for those two months they charged me extra for) and
changed to another one (who promised to fix my problem if I'd go with
them but never did even after two months of their service.  I ended
up purchasing a new VOIP unit (which both carriers said wasn't the
problem and pointed their finger at my Cisco router instead)) and
replacing it blindly.  Problem solved).

     I wouldn't put too much faith in what the VOIP carriers tell you. 
Their service saves money.  But their technical support and customer
service often stink.

     Regards,

                                                 Fred




Date: 01 Sep 2011 14:26:18 GMT
From: Doug McIntyre <merlyn@geeks.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Where does digital phone service hand off toll-free calls?   
Message-ID: <4e5f960a$0$74948$8046368a@newsreader.iphouse.net>

"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> writes:
>On another topic, what is the correct term for these servers that provide
>VoIP service? Packet routing is done Internet style and won't even hit
>the telephone network till it gets to the switch serving the dialed number.
>And if that number is also VoIP, a telephone call hasn't even been made.

There are two functions in VoIP, and they are usually separate and distributed.

The actual one you are asking for is a VoIP Gateway. Cisco has turned
their general purpose router platforms into a huge range of them.
Other vendors (Quintum, AudioCodes, Patton to name a few) have
dedicated boxes. Usually ISDN PRI in/out and an ethernet port. 
The small user boxes that turn VoIP back to POTS can be called this too.

Then there are also the servers that function as a soft switch with
additional services bundled in. Usually a VoIP provider's gateways all
register back to the soft switch so it can determine the best routing plan.
After the call setups, the VoIP gateways usually are the ones that
talk directly to one another in a big mesh. The big players probably
run their own code for this function. There are some open source
variants such as Freeswitch. Cisco's CallManager software would do
this function. 




Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 15:10:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Disconnected POTS (Cable phone service disrupted from power   outage)
Message-ID: <df6632a4-8e7b-434c-a36f-2298f37219fb@s20g2000yql.googlegroups.com>

On Aug 31, 7:42~pm, "Gary" <bogus-em...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Adam H. Kerman" ~wrote in messagenews:j3lmcb$7vv$3@news.albasani.net...
>
> > Does that mean a subsequent subscriber at the same service address would
> > be
> > able to order POTS and not FiOS?
>
> My understanding is the copper line is basically dead and has been removed
> from Verizon's list of provisioned, active and maintained lines. ~If I or a
> subsequent resident of my house wants to bring back the copper, it will
> probably require a significant amount of money; if it is even an option.
> However, if that's what I wanted I wouldn't have switched to FiOS.

I'm not sure I agree with that.

[ moderator snip ]

** Moderator note: Verizon has an established policy of decommissioning the 
   copper when FiOS is installed. It locks the location into Verizon service,
   since a CLEC cannot get a 'copper pair' to that location, and can't 'ride
   the fiber', either.

   See the Digest archives for prior discussion about that policy.






TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom 
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information: http://telecom-digest.org


Copyright (C) 2011 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.



Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
End of The Telecom Digest (5 messages)

Return to Archives ** Older Issues