No disagreement there. It's definitely a pain. Have to see how the politics play out on this one before doing too much work.
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Jason Aarons (AM) < [email protected]> wrote: > You get into a mess of regulatory issues. > > > > Often I find that a cost to call in-country might be cheaper had I dialed > the number another method than TEHO. Say for example International. > > > > I once setup TEHO from Atlanta, GA to go out Charlotte, NC for area code > 704 calls. Turns out customer was actually calling Shelby, NC which was a > intra-lata rate which the telco then charged more for. Had I just called > it Long Distance it would have been far cheaper. > > > > Then you have design issues with TEHO. How many people are going to be > calling to another city, and will that create utilization issues with > incoming calls in that city? > > > > I was a fan of TEHO in the 1980s but no longer. Seems the international > rates have gotten more competitive over the years , and internally we > chat/im more and more than call via PSTN. > > > > *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf > Of *Erick Wellnitz > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 21, 2014 12:11 PM > *To:* cisco-voip > *Subject:* [cisco-voip] International TEHO challenges > > > > > > > > Did a google search but want to verify that there is no authoritative list > of countries where TEHO is prohibited. > > > > I find international TEHO, especially to less developed countries to be a > minefield of regulations. > > > > itevomcid >
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
