Re: [VoiceOps] Nortel Equipment

Maybe check with the Connections Museum in Seattle?  With their recent acquisition of a DMS-10, they might be interested. https://www.telcomhistory.org/connections-museum-seattle/ On 2024-02-26 15:34, Ronald Loneker via VoiceOps wrote: Hi Everyone - Not sure where to find a home for this,

Re: [VoiceOps] Spike in customers numbers showing SPAM?

We had two reports on 2024-01-25.  Both were reporting that Verizon cellphone recipients would see "Potential Spam" if they called from their main number. One is a manufacturer in one of our ILEC exchanges, OCN 1505. The other is a school in one of our CLEC exchanges, OCN 914F. These are A

Re: [VoiceOps] troubleshooting RTP loss - and does anyone use webair/opti9?

mtr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTR_(software) It isn't specific to VoIP. But it is still a very good first step in troubleshooting which hop the packet loss begins at. Unlike the basic traceroute tools that come with Linux or Windows, it can run continuously for however long you need,

Re: [VoiceOps] Voice Peering

Who can source email from a domain is more-or-less a solved problem by using DNS SPF records. An SPF record is a list of IP addresses[1] that is allowed to send email for a domain. When an email server receives an email, best practice is to do a DNS lookup for the SPF of the alleged sender

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7 Landscape

On 2023-10-24 15:11, Mike Hammett wrote: Recommend\don't recommend? Anything to watch out for? The offer I got was attractive, but not everything that's attractive is what it seems. We used to have Onvoy/Inteliquent SS7 via TDM, which was reliable.  Two A-Links, to two geographically

Re: [VoiceOps] SS7 Landscape

Yes.  Any particular questions? On 2023-10-24 08:18, Mike Hammett via VoiceOps wrote: Any experience with Inteliquent for SS7\SIGTRAN services? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

Re: [VoiceOps] A2P-aaS

That's what we use for automated notifications to on-call techs of P1 tickets. We wrote code to email a short message to the appropriate domain. This list we use is Inteliquent's: https://help.inteliquent.com/sending-emails-to-sms-or-mms For example: AT: num...@txt.att.net (SMS),

Re: [VoiceOps] Directory Listings

On 2023-08-21 17:16, Mike Hammett via VoiceOps wrote: We've come across some legacy customers that have directory listings through us (or, well, at least we're paying Frontier for them). 1. Are those a thing in the VoIP space? Can I go to {insert SIP provider here} and they can place

Re: [VoiceOps] Carriers that support cic codes

On 2023-08-04 09:37, Jeff Anderson via VoiceOps wrote: If a SIP carrier wanted to support equal access, is there anything like a SIP tandem provider that can accept any Carrier Identification Code (cic=) and route to the appropriate LD carrier? The TDM equivalent might be something like

Re: [VoiceOps] Call term misrouting?

On 2023-07-26 17:43, Paul Timmins via VoiceOps wrote: I wouldn't be surprised to see carriers dumping these calls via a GSM gateway, this is really common in europe with gray routes. It'd explain why you get weird cellular voicemail, if they sent the number to the cell phone wrong to actually

Re: [VoiceOps] Call term misrouting?

I serve a rural area. I do the technical "make it work" stuff. I'm generally only involved in the business dealings insofar as determining technical incompatibilities (draw 7 red lines, all perpendicular, some with green ink and some with transparent). That said, please forgive any errors

Re: [VoiceOps] No-commit international calling

On 2023-07-13 14:34, Ross Tajvar via VoiceOps wrote: Looks like voip.ms is one option. Does anyone have any other suggestions? I use voip.ms for my personal tinkering.  I don't have much of a /need/ for them, since I operate an entire telephone company of my own (my

Re: [VoiceOps] STIR/SHAKEN warning!

On 2023-07-12 16:37, Nathan Anderson via VoiceOps wrote: By the way, love your test tool service.  Thanks for putting it together and maintaining it...what a gift to the community. There are a handful of S/S testing tools out there, but yours is easily the most comprehensive...most just

Re: [VoiceOps] dynect oracle end of life

Wherever possible, we use RFC 2136, to the primary authoritative name server. pfSense firewalls, for example, support RFC 2136 for Dynamic DNS (tracking the WAN IP when DHCP changes it) and for Acme Certificates (demonstrate control of the FQDN). RFC 2136 is also a nice method for internal

Re: [VoiceOps] 911 Records of Inbound-Only TNs

A maybe simpler example to what you are asking would be TEEN lines, where calling the TEEN number makes the parent station ring with a distinctive pattern. The subscriber has no way of making an outbound call with that TEEN number. Should we bother setting up a 911 record for that TEEN

Re: [VoiceOps] Rate Center Geodata

Nice work, Paul!  I spot checked a few that are in my area.  The coordinates are not perfect, but are close.  In general, the coordinates are within a mile of the central office. ___ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org

Re: [VoiceOps] Call recording and single party versus all party consent states

Good question! I would love to see some sort of matrix (calling state/called state). It might also depend on which side is the originator. For example, AZ->CA might be different than CA->AZ. Everything will get even more complicated if a call involves a transfer, or a conference bridge. I

Re: [VoiceOps] Neustar SOA Archives

On 2023-02-22 17:28, Paul Timmins via VoiceOps wrote: Ask to get a BDD set up from the NPAC and you'll have a copy of the regional LNP database every morning, piping fresh. You'l want to write a script or something because the files are a lot too big for something like excel, but a comparison

Re: [VoiceOps] Passing the Voiceops torch

rier grade (meaning it costs a lot of money) softswtch platforms that are ready for this, or seem like they would be without a multi-year effort. Anybody out there that can enlighten us on this one? Sincerely, Mike Johnston ___ VoiceOps mailing lis

Re: [VoiceOps] test

DNS test looks good. ___ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Abandoned Ported Numbers

Can anybody reference any regulations that would /require/ such numbers be returned?  Something from say, the FCC's website? I'm looking to provide for something more than just, "common practice". I appreciate everybody's help! ___ VoiceOps mailing

[VoiceOps] Abandoned Ported Numbers

Say a subscriber ports a number to/from a different telco. Then, after some time, the subscriber decides they no longer want the phone number (or phone service in general). What should be done with this abandoned number? Should the number immediately be returned to the donor telco? Should

Re: [VoiceOps] Lack of Sandbox

I wish more 911 systems had a 933 number. I've made actual 911 calls for testing purposes more times than I can remember. I always call the Sheriff's Office admin line first, asking if this is an alright time. But sometimes my 911 call is routed to a different county than I expected, and

Re: [VoiceOps] 9-8-8 dialing when an outside line access code (9) is being used

On 2022-07-15 10:19, Carlos Alvarez wrote: We stopped the useless "outside line" concept almost a decade ago. I would like to second that.  There is no need to dial a "9" (or 8, or whatever) to seize an outside line anymore.  We are no longer using mechanical step switches, and as such, are

Re: [VoiceOps] SIP Trunk Failover

On 2022-06-09 14:42, Peter Beckman wrote: Maybe a better question: When providing SIP Trunk Failover as a feature, what do customer accounts use more often -- per TN or everything? Everything. It is rare for the customer to request different failover behaviors for different DIDs. At least

Re: [VoiceOps] SIP Trunk Failover

I agree with Jay, it is very customer specific.  We offer all varieties of failover to meet their needs. Some have multiple sites with us and want the entire trunk to failover to a trunk at an alternate site.  This requires the alternate site to be prepared to accept all of the DIDs of the

Re: [VoiceOps] STI-CA average pricing

On 2022-06-06 16:13, Mary Lou Carey wrote: I'm not sure what type of switch you have, but this only works with VOIP. If you still use your SS7 network then it doesn't apply because no one has figured out how to make it work properly with SS7. We have Ribbon C15 switches. We have a mix of TDM

Re: [VoiceOps] STI-CA average pricing

On 2022-06-03 22:22, Nathan Anderson wrote: To put my response to this pricing in context, we are a relatively small regional broadband provider, and voice is a fraction of a fraction of our business. I'd wager just about everyone else here has a larger voice subscriber base than we do, and

Re: [VoiceOps] Arbitration or Peering?

Not sure if this is related or not, but I have been receiving an increase in complaints of calls not getting to my subscribers. The originators says they get ringing forever, ring a couple times then a tone and silence, and other such non-sense.  This is typical rural call completion issues.

Re: [VoiceOps] CNAM Storage

OpenCNAM from Telo was the ultimate answer to all things CNAM, at least in my opinion. They would actually PAY YOU for your storage, since they make money off of selling it to others. But, they were acquired by Neustar. ___ VoiceOps mailing list

Re: [VoiceOps] DIDWW API DNS Issue

Losing millions of dollars. Very nicely said. Then there are those that move their website, with their DNS, to a different provider, and are then confused as to why their email is broken. Of course it is the email providers fault, and they have no comprehension that it might somehow be

Re: [VoiceOps] Vendor Pros\Cons

I feel I should also mention that even though the C15's CLI is a bit...old school, the platform is quite robust. Especially if you are using SIP, there are very few failure modes that would cause a service impacting event. Everything is redundant and can generally shift the call flows around

Re: [VoiceOps] Vendor Pros\Cons

On 2021-12-23 08:08, Shawn L wrote: The C15/20 series is still pretty much all CLI, despite the fact that they've been saying they've had a GUI for years (awful, awful java-based thing). The C15's CLI is not very intuitive, being a living relic of its DMS heritage.  There are different

Re: [VoiceOps] Carriers Keeping Acquired Defunct Company Names

I see situations up here in Minnesota where it appears that CenturyLink is essentially CLECing themselves.  An simple example would be Warroad, MN. https://www.telcodata.us/search-area-code-exchange-by-ratecenter-state?ratecenter=WARROAD=MN CENTURYTEL OF MINNESOTA, INC. (CenturyLink, Inc) OCN

Re: [VoiceOps] STIR/SHAKEN concerns

2. If your network is partially TDM and partially VOIP, have you experienced any issues with either of them? What are your future concerns since STIR/SHAKEN does not work with TDM? We have a mix of TDM and SIP. We are continuing to work towards an all SIP network. However, our aging

Re: [VoiceOps] Call Quality

On 2021-06-16 16:42, Jared Geiger wrote: Does Ribbon/Sonus charge extra for it even in passthrough modes On my Ribbon C15s, there is no extra charge/license for G722. However, we do need to pay licenses for SIP trunks in general, which is by far the largest barrier towards modernizing our

Re: [VoiceOps] Call Quality

On 2021-06-14 12:07, Richard Jobson wrote: before going to the PSTN which is clamped at G.711 narrowband This is starting to get a /little/ bit better, but progress is painfully slow.  For example, Inteliquent supports G722, you just need to ask for it to be enabled on your SIP trunks with

Re: [VoiceOps] Malformed Caller ID

The first thing I thought of was Least Cost Routing to a rural area. My telco is rural. We see issues like that now and then. Setup the same call over and over again and you will probably get a handful of different CID/CNAM results at the recipient end. Not saying this is your issue, but

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

On 2021-01-22 12:44, Carlos Alvarez wrote: The number in question is not with us, and never has been.  We believe the customer abandoned the number long ago.  They have been with us 5+ years, and we had never seen that number before.  So it's probably abandoned with the old carrier I can

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

On 2021-01-21 17:42, Pete Mundy wrote: on the PoTS equipment I'm familiar with (others can chime in and correct me if I'm wrong on a larger scale) the numbers are reversed According to Wikipedia : In most switching systems

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

On 2021-01-21 17:25, Brandon Svec wrote: but it also seems just as likely for*any* number to be dialed as it does for 911 so I am still not 100% convinced, but am open to knowing more. Certainly 0 for the operator being 10 pulses should happen at least as often if not more than 911 since it

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

- pause   - 1 interruption For lines that are shorting out, arcing, in water, or whatever, it is only a matter of time. -Mike Johnston ___ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Got my first inbound call with a STIR/SHAKEN checkmark

On 2020-09-09 23:22, Pete Mundy wrote: I agree, and I believe it will happen somewhere around approximately the turn of the 22nd century. I see you are a glass-half-full sort of guy. ___ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org

Re: [VoiceOps] FUSF is 26.5% for Q3 2020: Discuss

If you were to install new facilities to a subscriber in a green field deployment, what technology would you use?  Fiber, right? Once that fiber is installed, what speed packages are available? All the way to at least gigabit, right? Yes, that means that some very rural areas are able to get

Re: [VoiceOps] One-time Bulk LRN Lookup

We also could use such a service. One provider suggested we just hit their API over and over again...even if that means we are slamming them with thousands of requests. We are able to do this, but it just feels like the wrong solution. On 2020-08-03 15:09, Mike Hammett wrote: Where's a good

Re: [VoiceOps] Trouble calling 8xx numbers

TL;DR: It was a fiber cut. Subject: Inteliquent Service interruption advisory || TT # 289412 From: Inteliquent NOC Date: Friday, 07/31/2020 12:48 PM Dear customer, Subject: Multiple DS3 outage in Minnesota Date: 07-31-20 Time Start: 01:17 CST Time Resolved: TBD Issue and actions taken:

[VoiceOps] Trouble calling 8xx numbers

...sigh). I am hearing that other telcos around me are having issues as well. Mike Johnston Wiktel NW Minnesota ___ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] Get ready for a weird dialplan change. 9-8-8 suicide hotline.

On 2020-07-19 11:21, Ryan Delgrosso wrote: if there is any pre-9 dialing going on, i just add a 8 digit and 11 digit check for leading 9s and drop them at ingress and then both use cases are gracefully managed. Sounds like a form of permissive dialing. Jam digits in, your translations will

Re: [VoiceOps] Get ready for a weird dialplan change. 9-8-8 suicide hotline.

On 2020-07-19 00:10, Matthew Yaklin wrote: they still want the 9. Sigh. Sigh, indeed. I have heard this from manglement on a couple occasions. Yet, when I remove the 9, especially when replacing a phone system, I am usually thanked by the individuals that actually use the phones. Tell

Re: [VoiceOps] Get ready for a weird dialplan change. 9-8-8 suicide hotline.

I second that. If your phone system requires a "9", you are doing it wrong. ___ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops