RE: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+matthew.black=csulb@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Larry Sheldon Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 12:11 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences On 4/20/2016 10:15, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> On Apr

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

>> On our VOIP service we include US, Canada and Puerto Rico as "local" >> calling. >I would imagine for VOIP that's because all three are country code 1 :) If you know a VoIP carrier that offers flat rates to 1-473, 1-664, and 1-767, I know some people who'd like to talk to you. At great

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 27/04/16 09:16, Owen DeLong wrote: > One thing I always found particularly amusing was that it used to be a toll > call to call from San Jose East (408238) to Sunnyvale (I forget the NPA/NXX), > but that there were several prefixes in San Jose West (e.g. 408360 IIRC) > where it was free to

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

View > Your Tickets > > > > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+ray=orsiniit@nanog.org] On Behalf Of > Larry Sheldon > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 3:11 PM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues

RE: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences On 4/20/2016 10:15, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> On Apr 20, 2016, at 7:59 AM, Jean-Francois Mezei >> <jfmezei_na...@vaxination.ca> wrote: >> >> On 2016-04-20 10:52, Owen DeLong wrote: >> &g

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 12:10 , Larry Sheldon wrote: > > > > On 4/20/2016 10:15, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >>> On Apr 20, 2016, at 7:59 AM, Jean-Francois Mezei >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 2016-04-20 10:52, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> For the most

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/20/2016 10:15, Owen DeLong wrote: On Apr 20, 2016, at 7:59 AM, Jean-Francois Mezei wrote: On 2016-04-20 10:52, Owen DeLong wrote: For the most part, “long distance” calls within the US are a thing of the past and at least one mobile carrier now treats

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

Dan, I think that you mean that AT is the 1-800 pound gorilla. I know engineers at AT that are bitter about that whole arrangement this many years on. I miss the glory days of everyone and their uncle spinning up a CLEC in the mid-90's. It made the ordering process complicated, especially if

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

Great explanation! Remember that LECs (Local Exchange Carrier, CenturyLink, Verizon, etc.) typically get to decide how this all works... ATT is still an 800 pound gorilla and a couple years ago stopped ALL payments to CLECs (Competitive Local Exchange Carrier, buy wholesale from LECs), took

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

>> For the most part, “long distance” calls within the US are a thing of the >> past and at least one mobile carrier now treats US/CA/MX as a single >> local calling area > >Is this a case of telcos having switched to IP trunks and can reach >other carriers for "free" No, it's because fiber

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 20, 2016, at 7:59 AM, Jean-Francois Mezei > wrote: > > On 2016-04-20 10:52, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> For the most part, “long distance” calls within the US are a thing of the >> past and at least one mobile carrier now treats US/CA/MX as a single >> local

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 2016-04-20 10:52, Owen DeLong wrote: > For the most part, “long distance” calls within the US are a thing of the > past and at least one mobile carrier now treats US/CA/MX as a single > local calling area Is this a case of telcos having switched to IP trunks and can reach other carriers for

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 15, 2016, at 2:21 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > In message , David Barak > writes > : >>> On Apr 15, 2016, at 3:09 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: >>> >>> Australia is about the area as the US and has always had

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

>The other answers address the history here better than I ever good, but >I wanted to point out one example I hadn't seen mentioned. > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_code_917 > >917 was originally a mobile only area code overlay in New York City. >For reasons that are unclear to me, after

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

This makes me wonder what the 'market value' of a 212 DID is. I have seen them anywhere from $55 to $600 from providers specifically saying "buy this DID and port it out to your carrier of choice". On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 7:06 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote: > In a message written on

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

In a message written on Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 09:49:37AM +0100, t...@pelican.org wrote: > Out of curiosity, does anyone have a good pointer to the history of how / why > US mobile ended up in the same numbering plan as fixed-line? The other answers address the history here better than I ever

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

Where I live (Europe) most plans include a ton of free minutes including free calls and data in many other countries. Therefore nobody cares who pays anymore. While this is not universal yet, it probably will be within a decade. Voice calls are simply silly small amount of data that it does not

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

>NA has a 10 digit scheme (3 area code - 7 local) though most of the >time you end up dialing the 10 digits. > >Australia has a 9 digit scheme (1 area code - 8 local) ... North America uses en bloc signalling, Australia uses CCITT style compelled signalling. That's why you have variable length

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 2016-04-15 17:21, Mark Andrews wrote: > Yes the area codes are huge (multi-state) and some "local" calls > are sometimes long distance. Until early 1990s, the 819 area code spanned from the US/canada Border in Québec, around Montréal (514), included the Laurentians and just about everything

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

In message , David Barak writes : > > On Apr 15, 2016, at 3:09 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > > Australia is about the area as the US and has always had caller > > pays and seperate area codes for mobiles. > > Australia has fewer

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 15, 2016, at 3:09 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > > Australia is about the area as the US and has always had caller > pays and seperate area codes for mobiles. Australia has fewer people than Texas, and is more than an order of magnitude smaller than the US by population.

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 15, 2016, at 12:09, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > In message <571105a6.3040...@nvcube.net>, Nikolay Shopik writes: >>> On 15/04/16 17:51, John R. Levine wrote: >>> Putting mobiles into a handful of non-geographic codes as they do in >>> Europe wouldn't work because the US

Re: [lists] Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

I highly doubt that your SIM card is depleted due to the US mobile phone billing structure. Sounds like a bad contract with a carrier that is billing you for incoming calls even though you aren't on the network, or bills you a fee each month when your SIM is inactive. Don't blame a country's

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

In message <571105a6.3040...@nvcube.net>, Nikolay Shopik writes: > On 15/04/16 17:51, John R. Levine wrote: > > Putting mobiles into a handful of non-geographic codes as they do in > > Europe wouldn't work because the US is a very large country, long > > distance costs and charges were important,

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 15/04/16 17:51, John R. Levine wrote: > Putting mobiles into a handful of non-geographic codes as they do in > Europe wouldn't work because the US is a very large country, long > distance costs and charges were important, and they needed to be able > to charge more for a mobile call across the

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On Friday, 15 April, 2016 15:51, "John R. Levine" said: > The US and most of the rest of North America have a fixed length > numbering plan designed in the 1940s by the Bell System. They offered > it to the CCITT which for political and technical reasons decided to > do

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

So maybe 10% of all cell phones are primarly used in the "wrong" area? Out of curiosity, does anyone have a good pointer to the history of how / why US mobile ended up in the same numbering plan as fixed-line? The US and most of the rest of North America have a fixed length numbering plan

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On Thursday, 14 April, 2016 16:32, "Leo Bicknell" said: > So maybe 10% of all cell phones are primarly used in the "wrong" area? Out of curiosity, does anyone have a good pointer to the history of how / why US mobile ended up in the same numbering plan as fixed-line? Over

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/14/2016 16:01, John Levine wrote: OK, let us suppose I want to be a law biding, up right American and use only a cellphone for the "right" area. I drive a big truck OTR. I usually know what part of which state I am in, but I frequently do not know which part of what state I will be in in

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

--- j...@kyneticwifi.com wrote: From: Josh Reynolds Is NANOG really the best place for this discussion? -- Filter it out. scott

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 14, 2016, at 14:01 , John Levine wrote: > >> OK, let us suppose I want to be a law biding, up right American and use >> only a cellphone for the "right" area. >> >> I drive a big truck OTR. I usually know what part of which state I am >> in, but I frequently do not

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 14, 2016, at 13:14 , Larry Sheldon wrote: > > On 4/14/2016 12:09, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >>> On Apr 14, 2016, at 05:46 , John Levine wrote: >>> If they're land lines, the NPA/NXX will be local to the CO so you won't have out-of-area

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

>OK, let us suppose I want to be a law biding, up right American and use >only a cellphone for the "right" area. > >I drive a big truck OTR. I usually know what part of which state I am >in, but I frequently do not know which part of what state I will be in >in 24 hours. > >What should I do?

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/14/2016 15:10, Larry Sheldon wrote: We wrote off a lot of revenue on calls that involved a company (if I remembered the name I still would not repeat it--ditto its location) which turn out to be pretty much one man who like to sell and install mobile radio telephone stations. And, it

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 2016-04-14 16:14, Larry Sheldon wrote: > Quick question: What happens (in the purely hypothetical case, I > sincerely hope) if the building is on fire and it turns out that the > VOIP-phone is the only one that works? VOIP: Not purely theoretical situation. 911 where I live would take

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/14/2016 12:09, Owen DeLong wrote: On Apr 14, 2016, at 05:46 , John Levine wrote: If they're land lines, the NPA/NXX will be local to the CO so you won't have out-of-area numbers other than a rare corner case of a very expensive foreign exchange line. If they're VoIP

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/14/2016 10:45, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote: . So maybe 10% of all cell phones are primarly used in the "wrong" area? Obligatory xkcd ref: https://xkcd.com/1129/ I am reminded of incidents many years ago when I

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/14/2016 10:32, Leo Bicknell wrote: In a message written on Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:29:39AM -, John Levine wrote: The people on nanog are not typical. I looked around for statistics and didn't find much, but it looks like only a few percent of numbers are ported each month, and it's

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

Since then, I’ve been pretty much satisfied with my service from callcentric and the price is right. That's who I use. Now there's just a box on the web site to say not in the US. R's, John

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 14, 2016, at 05:46 , John Levine wrote: > >> If they're land lines, the NPA/NXX will be local to the CO so you won't >> have out-of-area numbers other than a rare corner case of a very >> expensive foreign exchange line. If they're VoIP lines, the address is >>

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

All, Is NANOG really the best place for this discussion? On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote: > . >> So maybe 10% of all cell phones are primarly used in the "wrong"

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote: . > So maybe 10% of all cell phones are primarly used in the "wrong" area? Obligatory xkcd ref: https://xkcd.com/1129/

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

In a message written on Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:29:39AM -, John Levine wrote: > The people on nanog are not typical. I looked around for statistics > and didn't find much, but it looks like only a few percent of numbers > are ported each month, and it's often the same numbers being ported >

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

"If they're land lines, the NPA/NXX will be local to the CO so you won't have out-of-area numbers other than a rare corner case of a very expensive foreign exchange line." This hasn't been a true statement since Local Number Portability. NPA/NXX is nothing more than 'where the number originally

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

>If they're land lines, the NPA/NXX will be local to the CO so you won't >have out-of-area numbers other than a rare corner case of a very >expensive foreign exchange line. If they're VoIP lines, the address is >*supposed* to be so registered, but softphones and even VoIP handsets >tend to

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/13/16 8:54 PM, Peter Beckman wrote: On Wed, 13 Apr 2016, Jay Hennigan wrote: When either of those people dial 9-1-1, where does the ambulance show up? I suspect your response was sarcastic, but when you dig into what really happens, it's not nearly as sophisticated as one might

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On Wed, 13 Apr 2016, Jay Hennigan wrote: On 4/13/16 4:28 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote: I am in frequent contact by a person that has a 917 NNX--numbered telephone who spends a lot of time with a person that has a 408 NNX--numbered telephone, and they both live in Metropolitan Boston When

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/13/16 4:28 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote: I am in frequent contact by a person that has a 917 NNX--numbered telephone who spends a lot of time with a person that has a 408 NNX--numbered telephone, and they both live in Metropolitan Boston When either of those people dial 9-1-1, where

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

John Levine: > > Bonus question: is there any way to find out whether and where a > number's been ported without spending telco level amounts of money? > Free would be nice. https://www.npac.com/the-npac/access/permitted-uses-of-user-data-contact-list Matthew Kaufman (Sent from my iPhone)

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

>I question whether (on a global scale) the odds are above 50-50 that a >number (other than a test line) is served by the switch NANPA associates >with the number. The people on nanog are not typical. I looked around for statistics and didn't find much, but it looks like only a few percent of

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/13/2016 15:12, Owen DeLong wrote: I guarantee you that many, if not most at this point, of those numbers are no longer actually handled by that switch most of the time. I suspect that there are more SS7 exceptions than default within that particular prefix which is why I chose it. I

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 4/13/2016 14:45, John R. Levine wrote: NANP geographical numbers can be located to a switch (give or take number portability within a LATA), but non-geographic numbers can really go anywhere. On the third hand, it's still true that the large majority of them are in the U.S. Would you agree

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

>Is there the equivalent of BGP for number portability where every telco >has the full table of who owns each prefix as well as individual routes >for ported numbers ? Not really. There's a switch database used for routing calls, but that's different from LNP which is a layer sort of above that.

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> And further to that, throw in Local Number Portability (LNP) and you > really need to know the full number in order to know which switch the > specific number is assigned to. Not all 408-921 prefixed numbers will go > to that switch in West San Jose. Right, like I said three messages ago

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 13, 2016, at 13:34 , Jean-Francois Mezei > wrote: > > On 2016-04-13 16:18, Peter Beckman wrote: > >> And further to that, throw in Local Number Portability (LNP) and you >> really need to know the full number in order to know which switch the >>

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

On 2016-04-13 16:18, Peter Beckman wrote: > And further to that, throw in Local Number Portability (LNP) and you > really need to know the full number in order to know which switch the > specific number is assigned to. Not all 408-921 prefixed numbers will go > to that switch in West San

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 13, 2016, at 12:45 , John R. Levine wrote: > >>> NANP geographical numbers can be located to a switch (give >>> or take number portability within a LATA), but non-geographic numbers >>> can really go anywhere. On the third hand, it's still true that the >>> large

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

NANP geographical numbers can be located to a switch (give or take number portability within a LATA), but non-geographic numbers can really go anywhere. On the third hand, it's still true that the large majority of them are in the U.S. Would you agree that 408-921 is a geographic number? No.

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

> On Apr 13, 2016, at 12:15 , John Levine wrote: > >>> Actually, it's probably both US and Canadian. When you call an 8xx >>> toll free number, the switch uses a database to route the call to >>> whatever carrier handles it, who can then do whatever they want. The >>> provider

Re: phone fun, was GeoIP database issues and the real world consequences

>> Actually, it's probably both US and Canadian. When you call an 8xx >> toll free number, the switch uses a database to route the call to >> whatever carrier handles it, who can then do whatever they want. The >> provider for that number, Callture, is in Ontario but they can >> terminate the