Re: [VoiceOps] AT&T Verizon to block text messaging

- > Peter Beckman Internet Guy > beck...@angryox.com > http://www.angryox.com/ > > ---___ &g

Re: [VoiceOps] AT&T Verizon to block text messaging

/ >>> ___ >>> VoiceOps mailing list >>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops >>> >> ___ >> VoiceOps mailing list >>

Re: [VoiceOps] Digium / Switchvox DMTF issue

liable for any damages or other > liability arising. > > > TeleGo Hosted PBX <https://youtu.be/DaT8YAZ4V0w> > ___ > VoiceOps mailing list > VoiceOps@voiceops.org > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops > -- Kent Adams Vice President of NextGen Network Operations and Development BCM One NextGen Communications Group ___ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] False 911 calls and old abandoned DID

at this point, just this week. > They've been our customer for over five years, and this number has never > been on our system. > ___ > VoiceOps mailing list > VoiceOps@voiceops.org > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] 3CX Trunk Unregistering

Pete, Does the same behavior happen regardless of how they are registered? Specifically SRV, vs A record, vs IP registration? We have experienced some peculiar behavior of this kind with customers and found that changing the host resolution method to be an effective strategy for "fixing" such prob

Re: [VoiceOps] Outages - T-Mobile?

The reports appear to be conflated. Verizon users among others cannot reach Tmobile customers and report their own carrier as the issue, regardless of fault. Now, the reports about Facebook messenger being down along with T-Mobile do seem suspicious, but the messenger issue has since been resolved.

Re: [VoiceOps] unusual attempts of calls to 60547290XX

Izzy, Northern Valley Communications is pretty frequently the destination when a PBX gets compromised these days. It appears to be part of a traffic stimulation scheme. On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 9:58 AM Izzy Goldstein - TeleGo < igoldst...@telego.net> wrote: > anyone else noticed this > > -- > > I

Re: [VoiceOps] Requirements for SHAKEN service providers

I believe if you look at the footnote on the third point you will find that they have realized the problems it will cause. I don't know of anything providing a path around it yet, but at least they acknowledge the rule is not perfect? "While the access limitation is reasonable, signing a given cal