What? in Teleblend http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r19422505 en Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:04:14 EDT Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:04:14 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19478714 jeffnyc : I am posting to Onesuite from Voicestick. I am at about 29 days so I must give it a few more days. I really need to be following up with Onesuite, not Voicestick as I dont want VS to close my account before the port. I've called Onesuite a few times and they dont say much. I am starting to think their customer service is pretty useless.

I probably will fill out the FCC complaint form anyway. I have nothing to lose and if (big if) FCC contacts either or both of the 2 companies on my behalf it would definitely help.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19478714 Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:45:07 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19478664 TeleblendGuy :
said by jeffnyc See Profile :

i put a port request a month ago that has not happened yet...
I guess I will give it another day or 2, then I will fill out the fcc online complaint form and hopefully that will help my get my port moving...
What did your new provider say about the port. Who do they say the underlying carrier is, and what does that carrier say about the number. I deal with ports all day long, and most of the time, the provider has released the number, and the old CARRIER has not let the number go.

Remember, this is all about revenue to them, and a lost number is lost revenue. As for the 48 hour thing, I doubt that will ever happen. Too many lobbyists in the DC area making sure that it does not. heck look how long it took for LNP to happen, and to this day not all the carriers play nice, and some take months to update the NPAC. LNP is one of the biggest nightmares to a consumer. I am glad that readers here actually read the FCC data, but making it a law, and enforcing it are 2 totally different things, in my own PERSONAL opinion.
--
Only TRUE Teleblend Support People are:
TeleblendGuy & TBSupport1
Support 877-252-4548 or Billing 877-488-5519
»teleblendsupport.net/support]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19478664 Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:35:40 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19477176 dmolavi :
said by jeffnyc See Profile :

i put a port request a month ago that has not happened yet...

according to the fcc news release, ports are supposed to happen within 48 hours, I guess these laws are not in place yet... but this paragraph is particularly of interest
quote:
The FCC also clarified in its Order that telephone companies may not obstruct or delay number porting by demanding excess information from the customer’s new provider, and specifically concluded that LNP validation for a simple number port should be based on no more than four fields: (1) 10-digit telephone number; (2) customer account number; (3) 5-digit zip code; and (4) pass code, if applicable. In its Notice, the FCC also tentatively concluded that it should require the industry to complete simple ports in 48 hours.


I guess I will give it another day or 2, then I will fill out the fcc online complaint form and hopefully that will help my get my port moving...
those rules don't take effect until 30 days after publication in the federal register. it's close, but not quite there yet.
--
Get your Gizmo Admin Passwords, Unlock Instructions, and How To use your Gizmo with other providers at »gizmopasswords.blogspot.com
NukedGallery.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19477176 Tue, 20 Nov 2007 07:54:28 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19474502 jeffnyc : i put a port request a month ago that has not happened yet...

according to the fcc news release, ports are supposed to happen within 48 hours, I guess these laws are not in place yet... but this paragraph is particularly of interest
quote:
The FCC also clarified in its Order that telephone companies may not obstruct or delay number porting by demanding excess information from the customer’s new provider, and specifically concluded that LNP validation for a simple number port should be based on no more than four fields: (1) 10-digit telephone number; (2) customer account number; (3) 5-digit zip code; and (4) pass code, if applicable. In its Notice, the FCC also tentatively concluded that it should require the industry to complete simple ports in 48 hours.


I guess I will give it another day or 2, then I will fill out the fcc online complaint form and hopefully that will help my get my port moving...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19474502 Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:33:48 EDT Thank You, N9MD http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19422766 Matt7 : I admit that I'm not nice at all when I'm extremely frustrated--as you have seen. Sorry for being snappy.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19422766 Sun, 11 Nov 2007 10:22:33 EDT Re: What? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19422583 N9MD :
said by Matt7 See Profile :

Not only did I explain who I was and why I changed my name in the very portion of my post that you quoted, N9MD, but I became a registered user before you decided to complain about me on another thread.
Actually, Matt, I was just using your posts as an example of the need to change one's "pen name" to continue to post anonomously. Your post was neither ranting nor inappropriate; it reflected frustration with which many of us can identify.

Moreover, I stated: That would encourage "nice people" (hopefully) to register. So obviously you are one of the "nice people". A warm welcome to you! :) ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19422583 Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:34:55 EDT What? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19422505 Matt7 : Not only did I explain who I was and why I changed my name in the very portion of my post that you quoted, N9MD, but I became a registered user before you decided to complain about me on another thread.

My experience with Sunrocket/Teleblend has been the worst, THE worst, I've ever had with any business so forgive me if I'm not "nice" about it. I want to spare others the same frustration and describing my experience "nicely" is less likely to do that. Sunrocket/Teleblend's incompetence is inexcusable.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19422505 Sun, 11 Nov 2007 09:07:53 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19417648 N9MD :
said by ptrowski See Profile :

What's going on with the recent rash of anonymous posters who love to underline everything? ;)
Rash seems to be the operative word. I get an annoying itchy rash whenever an anonymous poster posts for the second time without registering. :uhh: I can understand one anonymous post from a casual lurker. But once that individual starts posting over and over, he or she should really register with BBR. It's not that anonymous posters are bad people or have nothing to contribute -- quite the opposite for some who have legitimate questions or helpful responses. It's just that we BBR members would like to feel they have joined our family. :)

said by Matt8 :

Hi N9MD. Thanks for replying. I'm having cookie problems, so I had to change my name to post again.
I have posted this quote from another thread to make a proposal (not of marriage) to the powers that be at BBR. Matt8 initiated a thread as Matt7. Maybe the system should reject any posts after the first one from each anonymous poster. :p That would encourage "nice people" (hopefully) to register -- or would result in a plethora of "silly names" from "unwelcome unknowns" (hereinafter referred to as UUs). :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19417648 Sat, 10 Nov 2007 10:18:32 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19417579 N9MD :
said by DigitalPure See Profile :

said by GoHardGoDeep See Profile :

Ummm.. VOIP companies were never able to hold you hostage. VOIP companies don't own the numbers. They are basically just renting them from people like Level 3, Verizon, etc....
Correct, ...
Incorrect ... as I see it. Until the FCC mandated VoIP-porting ruling is confirmed, a VoIP provider has not been required to release your DID#. The provider leases blocks of numbers from one or more CLECs. Thus, so long as the provider is willing to pay the monthly charge to the CLEC for holding the number (even if it is not being used), the CLEC cannot arbitrarily move your number to another provider. That would be like your landlord renting your apartment to another individual even though you hold a current lease on the space.

I, for one, am very pleased with the pending FCC ruling. It removes the potential angst for those porting from place to place (often more than once for the same number) due to the vagueries and unpredictability of the VoIP arena.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19417579 Sat, 10 Nov 2007 10:01:40 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19412078 ptrowski : What's going on with the recent rash of anonymous posters who love to underline everything? ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19412078 Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:31:11 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411608 DigitalPure :
said by GoHardGoDeep See Profile :

Ummm.. VOIP companies were never able to hold you hostage. VOIP companies don't own the numbers. They are basically just renting them from people like Level 3, Verizon, etc. They don't control who has them, or anything like that. They are at the mercy of the carrier to give them the telephone call.

This is actually better for people wanting to come to VOIP. This means that people like Verizon, Qwest, and SBC can't try to be jerks about their porting by asking for more information than necessary just because you are going to voip. They have to play the same way with VOIP companies as they would with the other Telco Companies.
Correct, since the carriers make money on each and every call, and providing the services to the end provider they hate to loose a number. Think about this, the big bells used to own the numbers, and now we have IP carriers that own numbers, and everyone has to pay a fee to a central location to know who has what number now. If you take a number away from a carrier you just cost them about $1-5.00 a month in revenue. Multiply this by the mas numbers of people moving numbers around and you can see where this is a massive issue.

So when someone says that X comapany was told by Y that X is holding the number from being ported, it is just them trying to make the other company look bad since they cannot do anything to speed up the carrier releasing the number. It also might be that they dont want to pay the $10-40.00 fee to get the number transfered to their trunk group from the carrier.

90% of the time the hold up is the carrier not wanting to loose the fee. 8% of the time it is the new provider not wanting to pay the outrageous transfer fees some of the carrier charge. The last 2% is the customer not providing the correct documentation of proof of ownership, or there being some service or stop on the line that prevents the transfer.

So, what can you do, call your new provider, and call your old provider and ask them to talk to each other. What you will hear is that BOTH sides will say "It is being proccessed, we will let you know when it is done".... have your new provider hang the phone up with the old provider, and then tell the new provider you would like them to check with the carrier and the NPAC about the LNP and see what is taking so long. Lastly remember that the carriers have up to 30 days to transfer the number, and there is NOTHING that you can do about it. If they want to hold the number, then tough luck. Don't believe me, go and read the rules from the NPAC yourself.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411608 Fri, 09 Nov 2007 10:14:01 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411032 bohemian : I am still trying to port Teleblend number to other VoIP phone company. It is more than a month now. I have been paying bills to both phone companies for last 2 bills. Hopefully, this will solve my problem.

Thanks.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19411032 Fri, 09 Nov 2007 08:08:51 EDT Re: The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19409945 GoHardGoDeep : Ummm.. VOIP companies were never able to hold you hostage. VOIP companies don't own the numbers. They are basically just renting them from people like Level 3, Verizon, etc. They don't control who has them, or anything like that. They are at the mercy of the carrier to give them the telephone call.

This is actually better for people wanting to come to VOIP. This means that people like Verizon, Qwest, and SBC can't try to be jerks about their porting by asking for more information than necessary just because you are going to voip. They have to play the same way with VOIP companies as they would with the other Telco Companies. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19409945 Thu, 08 Nov 2007 23:00:04 EDT The FCC has expanded LNP to VOIP http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19408618 anon : You had us by the neck, but no longer.

BYE BYE

Now that we can port our numbers, VOIP providers, like Teleblend can't hold us hostage.

News article Thursday November 8, 2007
VoIP Numbers No Longer Hard to Port
Categories: VoIP

Good news for the thousands of victims of the next big VoIP service provider crash: The Federal Communications Commission has expanded local number portability (LNP) to VoIP.

(It's come little late for those of us among the thousands caught in the death throes of SunRocket last July, but I'm not bitter. Much. Still, it's nice to know SunRocket customers' complaints may have helped push this ruling through.)

If you're not clear on the topic, LNP allows you to take your land-line phone number with you from one carrier to the next. That means, if you move from Verizon to another provider--even a digital/Internet phone like that offered by TimeWarner along with RoadRunner broadband--you can keep that number that's been in your house for 38 years.

That's what my parents did. But there wasn't a guarantee that TimeWarner's phone services had to give up the number if they switched back--or switched to a different VoIP company, like Vonage. Until today.

The best part: The FCC says VoIP providers are not allowed to hold up your switch to a new provider. Its got to happen within 48 hours of the request.

Companies can't even ask for more than four bits of info from other providers when porting, just your phone number, account number, zip code and pass code (if applicable). Major info-dump requests have been used to hold up porting in the past. No more.

This is good for VoIP companies -- they're being treated like they matter enough to have the rule apply. Like big kids! What isn't good for them may be that customers can split whenever they want and take their number with them --in some cases it may have been the only thing keeping the customer tethered to a specific provider. To which I say, boo hoo. Make the service with staying on and it won't be an issue.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,19408618 Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:12:21 EDT