Re: [VoiceOps] FW: Strange porting issue

2016-02-09 Thread Peter Beckman
What was the outcome? On Tue, 9 Feb 2016, Darren Schreiber wrote: W00t! Thanks guys :-) Fun mystery solved From: Mary Lou Carey > Reply-To: Mary Lou Carey > Date:

Re: [VoiceOps] FW: Strange porting issue

2016-02-09 Thread Darren Schreiber
Our upstream CLEC ended up using the contacts here provided (thanks guys!) to hunt the carrier down apparently. First, the carrier de-activated the number but then everyone got a busy signal who called (only from within that ILEC of course). Then the LRN was reprovisioned apparently, and all

Re: [VoiceOps] FW: Strange porting issue

2016-02-09 Thread Mary Lou Carey
Here's the website for the carrier. Found it through Local Calling Guide..http://www.lafayettela.gov/Pages/Index.aspx > On February 5, 2016 at 7:41 PM Darren Schreiber wrote: > > Hi folks, > We have an upstream CLEC who ported a number from us from a LEC I've

Re: [VoiceOps] FW: Strange porting issue

2016-02-09 Thread Darren Schreiber
W00t! Thanks guys :-) Fun mystery solved From: Mary Lou Carey > Reply-To: Mary Lou Carey > Date: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 9:05 AM To:

[VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Colton Conor
How do cellular carriers perform almost instant porting of number, and why can't landline providers do the same? For example if I take my Sprint cell phone to an AT store, and switch over to AT they can do this almost instantly. I met someone one time at a tradeshow claiming they could do same

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Adam Vocks
Our landline ports are instantaneous. (Or so we think.) It’s always been that way for us. I didn’t know there was any other way. Adam From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Colton Conor Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 2:52 PM To: voiceops@voiceops.org

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Alex Balashov
This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Paul Timmins
If both carriers have a good business relationship and are willing to write matching orders in the NPAC (winning carrier makes the subscriptions, the losing carrier submits concurrence) you can port numbers in literally seconds. But we're not required to do things that fast so it rarely

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Nathan Anderson
Yeah, they are talking about wireless ports, where between carriers, you can achieve same-day FOC within minutes of the end-user requesting a port-out. So, from the very very beginning to the very very end, it is measured in minutes instead of days. -- Nathan

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Shawn L
Wow. Try porting a large customer from AT oh, that's not a simple port, that's a project. And, one number isn't in our database, so we can't do it. Or, the physical location doesn't match, so we can't do it. -Original Message- From: "Adam Vocks" Sent:

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Peter Beckman
+1 I want to know! I'm betting it is the fact that Wireless Carriers were forced by the FCC to interconnect in order to do this, and that in most cases, ILECs and CLECs are not nearly so sophisticated, and therefore the process is wholely manual. Which means you have to wait for Susan to come

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Adam Vocks
Forget I said anything. You guys are talking about something different. I was referring to when our tech goes out to install our phone service, the LOA/FOC process is already complete and we just make a change to NPAC and calls start flowing in. Adam From: VoiceOps

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Alex Balashov
One would think that the incentives would diverge depending on whether the given wireless operator expects to be a net beneficiary of porting in or a net loser to porting out -- a function of their market position, which is not equal. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303

[VoiceOps] Fwd: Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Alexander Lopez
Original message From: Alexander Lopez Date: 2/9/2016 6:07 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Alexander Lopez Subject: RE: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting Market positions change, and one year your on top in a given market, and then the next year your

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Alexander Lopez
I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline. The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others. Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Carlos Alcantar
A lot of it goes into literally 4 companies working together to have automation. I don't know that process would scale if it was hundreds of companies trying to accomplish the same thing without a clearinghouse in the middle and everyone talking the same language. ​ Carlos Alcantar Race

Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting

2016-02-09 Thread Paul Timmins
A lot of it also comes down to cellular portability being required by the FCC to process ports in 4 hours or less from the day it was started as well. The FCC saw how wireline worked and said they weren't going to have that on wireless. Shortly after they cleaned up wireline (it used to be much