Re: [VoiceOps] LRN and valid values

[Paul Timmins]

> I don't know. I cannot seem to get my carrier to identify a situation where
> I would want to terminate a call and the LRN I would get back would be
> 732040 or similar. 

It never will. The code is unrouteable. I'm sure it exists in the LERG 
somewhere for some sort of pANI or billing purpose, but that doesn't make it a 
routable code.

> I'm trying to figure out if I don't know something or if my termination 
> carrier is mildly nutso.


The people making the rate deck have no idea how the network actually works. 
They just think it costs X to terminate a call to pac bell or whatever so they 
include it, despite it not being a dialable code.

> Unless it will occur and there's something I don't know or understand.

In 20 years of running telcodata.us , and 15 years of 
running the network of a regional CLEC, I've never seen any code like that in 
the network outside of AT's weird BTNs (313-K60- and such) but those 
again, aren't billable and in that case aren't even really numbers and in any 
case, don't appear in the PSTN at all, just in category 11 files and on bills 
and ASRs and LSRs)

-Paul


> On May 27, 2021, at 12:08 AM, Peter Beckman  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 26 May 2021, Alex Balashov wrote:
> 
>> Where does this conflict emerge in practice? Do customers call numbers in
>> this exchange? Do you get billed for calls (less any LRN dip fees) to this
>> exchange even though none of your wholesale termination vendors can route it?
> 
> I don't know. I cannot seem to get my carrier to identify a situation where
> I would want to terminate a call and the LRN I would get back would be
> 732040 or similar. They keep telling me that it exists in the LERG6 and
> LERG6ATC and LERG6ODD, and that's fine, but why would it be in an NPANXX
> rate deck???
> 
> On Wed, 26 May 2021, Paul Timmins wrote:
> 
>> How are you even getting operator assisted calls onto your network to begin
>> with? Do you have an operator service you still pay for?
> 
> I'm not, AFAIK. This is a termination deck. I don't even know of a phone
> number that would return an LRN like this. I'm trying to figure out if I
> don't know something or if my termination carrier is mildly nutso.
> 
> On Thu, 27 May 2021, Jamie Montgomery wrote:
> 
>> There is an entry for 732040A.. OCN refers back to Verizon of Jew Jersey. The
>> Rate Center is all X's, so it's a special code of some kind..  cant be 
>> assinged
>> to an originating number, I dont believe.
> 
> And that's what I'm trying to figure out. I believe the same, but if this
> is true, why would a termination rate deck include 732040 as an LRN prefix
> so we can do LCR? Why include a rate in a deck that will never occur?
> 
> Unless it will occur and there's something I don't know or understand.
> 
> Thus this thread. :-)
> 
> Beckman
> ---
> Peter Beckman  Internet Guy
> beck...@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/
> ---
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

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

Re: [VoiceOps] LRN and valid values

[Peter Beckman]

On Wed, 26 May 2021, Alex Balashov wrote:


Where does this conflict emerge in practice? Do customers call numbers in
this exchange? Do you get billed for calls (less any LRN dip fees) to this
exchange even though none of your wholesale termination vendors can route it?


I don't know. I cannot seem to get my carrier to identify a situation where
I would want to terminate a call and the LRN I would get back would be
732040 or similar. They keep telling me that it exists in the LERG6 and
LERG6ATC and LERG6ODD, and that's fine, but why would it be in an NPANXX
rate deck???

On Wed, 26 May 2021, Paul Timmins wrote:


How are you even getting operator assisted calls onto your network to begin
with? Do you have an operator service you still pay for?


I'm not, AFAIK. This is a termination deck. I don't even know of a phone
number that would return an LRN like this. I'm trying to figure out if I
don't know something or if my termination carrier is mildly nutso.

On Thu, 27 May 2021, Jamie Montgomery wrote:


There is an entry for 732040A.. OCN refers back to Verizon of Jew Jersey. The
Rate Center is all X's, so it's a special code of some kind..  cant be assinged
to an originating number, I dont believe.


And that's what I'm trying to figure out. I believe the same, but if this
is true, why would a termination rate deck include 732040 as an LRN prefix
so we can do LCR? Why include a rate in a deck that will never occur?

Unless it will occur and there's something I don't know or understand.

Thus this thread. :-)

Beckman
---
Peter Beckman  Internet Guy
beck...@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/
---
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Re: [VoiceOps] LRN and valid values

[Jamie Montgomery]

There is an entry for 732040A.. OCN refers back to Verizon of Jew Jersey. The 
Rate Center is all X's, so it's a special code of some kind..  cant be assinged 
to an originating number, I dont believe.


Jamie M.


From: VoiceOps  on behalf of 
voiceops-requ...@voiceops.org 
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2021 4:12 PM
To: voiceops@voiceops.org 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] VoiceOps Digest, Vol 140, Issue 3

Send VoiceOps mailing list submissions to
voiceops@voiceops.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fvoiceopsdata=04%7C01%7Cjamie.montgomery%40comporium.com%7C534982314cb34db4c82908d92082d6ed%7C4c52dc5e4ed54645a209ed3c32f5ec3c%7C0%7C0%7C637576712042937226%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=jwExmLUtviQjk9Gcinrmdkmx%2FZXgJFoa3W%2BgXp7OCkQ%3Dreserved=0
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
voiceops-requ...@voiceops.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
voiceops-ow...@voiceops.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of VoiceOps digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. LRN and valid values (Peter Beckman)
   2. Re: LRN and valid values (Alex Balashov)
   3. Re: LRN and valid values (Paul Timmins)
   4. Robocall mitigation SCAM! (Mary Lou Carey)
   5. Re: Robocall mitigation SCAM! (Mark Lindsey)
   6. Re: Robocall mitigation SCAM! (Matthew Yaklin)


--

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 22:47:24 -0400
From: Peter Beckman 
To: VoiceOps 
Subject: [VoiceOps] LRN and valid values
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII

Carrier A provided us a US NPANXX Rate Deck that had some values in it that
were not valid, such as 732040.

When asked about it, they claim that Access Tandem Codes are valid LRN
values for operator services calls.

Carrier B provides an API for us to query to get the LRN for a termination
number, so we can rate it properly and implement our own LCR. Carrier B
says LRNs will always be valid NPANXX values, and 732040 and similar would
never be returned.

I don't have access to the LERG, and frankly, even if I did, I'm not sure
where I'd look to see who wins the conflict.

Any suggestions?

Beckman
---
Peter Beckman  Internet Guy
beck...@angryox.com 
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.angryox.com%2Fdata=04%7C01%7Cjamie.montgomery%40comporium.com%7C534982314cb34db4c82908d92082d6ed%7C4c52dc5e4ed54645a209ed3c32f5ec3c%7C0%7C0%7C637576712042937226%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=zKJMJFMTepkCz8OVP30617%2FObvN9p7v%2BCZ0ZKaLa0oc%3Dreserved=0
---


--

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 00:02:51 -0400
From: Alex Balashov 
To: VoiceOps 
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] LRN and valid values
Message-ID: <0d4fb8a5-31eb-42c3-82bb-e76a88e4b...@evaristesys.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Where does this conflict emerge in practice? Do customers call numbers in this 
exchange? Do you get billed for calls (less any LRN dip fees) to this exchange 
even though none of your wholesale termination vendors can route it?

?
Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.

> On May 25, 2021, at 10:48 PM, Peter Beckman  wrote:
>
> ?Carrier A provided us a US NPANXX Rate Deck that had some values in it that
> were not valid, such as 732040.
>
> When asked about it, they claim that Access Tandem Codes are valid LRN
> values for operator services calls.
>
> Carrier B provides an API for us to query to get the LRN for a termination
> number, so we can rate it properly and implement our own LCR. Carrier B
> says LRNs will always be valid NPANXX values, and 732040 and similar would
> never be returned.
>
> I don't have access to the LERG, and frankly, even if I did, I'm not sure
> where I'd look to see who wins the conflict.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Beckman
> ---
> Peter Beckman  Internet Guy
> beck...@angryox.com 
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.angryox.com%2Fdata=04%7C01%7Cjamie.montgomery%40comporium.com%7C534982314cb34db4c82908d92082d6ed%7C4c52dc5e4ed54645a209ed3c32f5ec3c%7C0%7C0%7C637576712042937226%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBT

Re: [VoiceOps] LRN and valid values

[Paul Timmins]

How are you even getting operator assisted calls onto your network to begin 
with? Do you have an operator service you still pay for?

> On May 25, 2021, at 10:47 PM, Peter Beckman  wrote:
> 
> Carrier A provided us a US NPANXX Rate Deck that had some values in it that
> were not valid, such as 732040.
> 
> When asked about it, they claim that Access Tandem Codes are valid LRN
> values for operator services calls.
> 
> Carrier B provides an API for us to query to get the LRN for a termination
> number, so we can rate it properly and implement our own LCR. Carrier B
> says LRNs will always be valid NPANXX values, and 732040 and similar would
> never be returned.
> 
> I don't have access to the LERG, and frankly, even if I did, I'm not sure
> where I'd look to see who wins the conflict.
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> Beckman
> ---
> Peter Beckman  Internet Guy
> beck...@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/
> ---
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

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

Re: [VoiceOps] LRN and valid values

[Alex Balashov]

Where does this conflict emerge in practice? Do customers call numbers in this 
exchange? Do you get billed for calls (less any LRN dip fees) to this exchange 
even though none of your wholesale termination vendors can route it?

—
Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.

> On May 25, 2021, at 10:48 PM, Peter Beckman  wrote:
> 
> Carrier A provided us a US NPANXX Rate Deck that had some values in it that
> were not valid, such as 732040.
> 
> When asked about it, they claim that Access Tandem Codes are valid LRN
> values for operator services calls.
> 
> Carrier B provides an API for us to query to get the LRN for a termination
> number, so we can rate it properly and implement our own LCR. Carrier B
> says LRNs will always be valid NPANXX values, and 732040 and similar would
> never be returned.
> 
> I don't have access to the LERG, and frankly, even if I did, I'm not sure
> where I'd look to see who wins the conflict.
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> Beckman
> ---
> Peter Beckman  Internet Guy
> beck...@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/
> ---
> ___
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps@voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

[VoiceOps] LRN and valid values

[Peter Beckman]

Carrier A provided us a US NPANXX Rate Deck that had some values in it that
were not valid, such as 732040.

When asked about it, they claim that Access Tandem Codes are valid LRN
values for operator services calls.

Carrier B provides an API for us to query to get the LRN for a termination
number, so we can rate it properly and implement our own LCR. Carrier B
says LRNs will always be valid NPANXX values, and 732040 and similar would
never be returned.

I don't have access to the LERG, and frankly, even if I did, I'm not sure
where I'd look to see who wins the conflict.

Any suggestions?

Beckman
---
Peter Beckman  Internet Guy
beck...@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/
---
___
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps@voiceops.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops