supergirl
join:2007-03-20
Pensacola, FL
 ·Cox VOIP
·Skype
 ·Cox HSI
 ·AT&T Southeast
·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to NetAdmin
Re: LNP Turbo Mode
said by NetAdmin  :said by AVonGauss :No, its not. VoIP is no different than a traditional telco, wireless or cable provider as far as LNP is concerned and should be treated no differently. With normal port requests with say Verizon or ATT, you only have to deal with a single party. With a VoIP port request, you have to deal with two parties - the VoIP provider and their upstream provider. So, despite what you believe, it is different. Umm, Bellsouth took over 2 weeks to port a number to Cox. I'd call that ridiculous since cell companies can do it 24 hrs.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl |
|
Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX | reply to nitzan
No, someone who has a broadband connection. I know some folks that have broadband connections who are totally lost on the technical end of things. |
|
nitzan
Premium,VIP
join:2008-02-27 | reply to Austinloop
You mean, the same non-technical older person who's never upgraded from dialup? the one who can't use VoIP anyway because they don't have a broadband connection? |
|
Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX
| reply to NetAdmin
Well, unfortunately, if some none technical type older person decides to swallow all that the company I referring to doesn't know that there is no guaranteed up time, possible delays with emergency calls, etc., then maybe, just maybe, the rules should be the same.
But I am sure that the VoIP companies fully explain the downside of their service, including no guaranteed up time fully to new customers.
To the vast majority of people, present forum excepted, phone service is phone service. |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to Austinloop
said by Austinloop :What requirements, precisely, placed on pots are impossible to deliver? The obvious one - guaranteed uptime.
said by Austinloop :I have seen ads for one of the VoIP companies saying they are your internet phone company. How are they different if they claim to provide phone service? They are a phone company, they provide you with a voice line. that you can use to talk to others on the POTS network.
Phone service comes in different flavors and VoIP is one of several different flavors of phone service. Other phone companies provide you with phone service, but are exempt from the same rules as POTS providers - cell carriers, satellite phone careers, etc.
--
---
Over ten plus years of carrying The Clue Bat... |
|
Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX | reply to NetAdmin
What requirements, precisely, placed on pots are impossible to deliver?
I have seen ads for one of the VoIP companies saying they are your internet phone company. How are they different if they claim to provide phone service? |
|
Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX | reply to NetAdmin
I had suggested, above, that VoIP ports be given 96 hours, instead of the 48 hours that a telco is given, since there are two parties involved. |
|
porting xpert
@spcsdns.net
| reply to NetAdmin
How is a VoIP provider's upstream in anyway involved in the porting process?
Granted, if the company didn't have their own switch and simply resold services, that's one thing. As long as the switch has its own LRN, porting can happen between the VoIP provider and the winning carrier. |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to Austinloop
said by Austinloop :And that is a real shame. No, it is a good thing. POTS and VOIP service, as they are now, are two vastly different types services. Some of the regulatory requirements placed on POTS are impossible to deliver with VOIP.
I would urge you to first understand why they are regulated differently before you blindly state that it "is a real shame" they are regulated differently.
--
---
Over ten plus years of carrying The Clue Bat... |
|
Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX | reply to NetAdmin
And that is a real shame. |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to Austinloop
VoIP is not even close to being regulated the same way as traditional POTS service, for good reasons, so the FCC would first have to put them on the same regulatory playing field as Verizon and ATT. And that isn't very likely.
--
---
Over ten plus years of carrying The Clue Bat... |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to AVonGauss
said by AVonGauss :No, its not. VoIP is no different than a traditional telco, wireless or cable provider as far as LNP is concerned and should be treated no differently. With normal port requests with say Verizon or ATT, you only have to deal with a single party. With a VoIP port request, you have to deal with two parties - the VoIP provider and their upstream provider. So, despite what you believe, it is different.
--
---
Over ten plus years of carrying The Clue Bat... |
|
AVonGauss
Premium,MVM
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | reply to NetAdmin
No, its not. VoIP is no different than a traditional telco, wireless or cable provider as far as LNP is concerned and should be treated no differently. |
|
Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX
| reply to NetAdmin
I am sure with the right motivation the companies involved with LNP in the VoIP arena could process the request in about 96 hours (twice that of the telco), since there are two companies involved. By the right motivation, I mean fines. If it is good for the goose, it should be just as good for the gander. |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to Austinloop
said by Austinloop :As long as it applies to VoIP as well as landline, I am fine with it. I have read a few horror stories about VoIP delaying porting on the various forums. VoIP LNP is a different ball of wax from your local telco or cableco. You actually have to wait for two companies to process and release the number for the phone number - your VoIP carrier and then the carrier from which they purchase voice transport. So the expectation that a VoIP port away should be as quick as a traditional POTS port away is problematic.
--
---
Over ten plus years of carrying The Clue Bat... |
|
