lsen
> Network Operations
> (855) FLSPEED x106
>
>
> ------
> *From*: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lo...@opsys.com> <alex.lo...@opsys.com>
> *Sent*: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM
> *To*: "Alex Balashov" <abalas...@evaristesy
ace.com
> > <mailto:car...@race.com> / http://www.race.com <http://www.race.com/>
> >
> >
> >
> > From: VoiceOps <voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org
> > <mailto:voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org>> on behalf o
t; <abalas...@evaristesys.com>,
"voiceops@voiceops.org" <voiceops@voiceops.org>
*Subject*: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
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
106
From: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lo...@opsys.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM
To: "Alex Balashov" <abalas...@evaristesys.com>, "voiceops@voiceops.org"
<voiceops@voiceops.org>
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
ut
>>>> in-line with my current wireline porting.
>>>>
>>>> I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their
>>>> best interest to work together.
>>>>
>>>> Not to mention, By automating the process. Th
h my current wireline porting.
> > > > >
> > > > >I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in
> > > > > all of their best interest to work together.
> > > > >
> > > > >
ops@voiceops.org" <voiceops@voiceops.org>
*Subject*: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
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
t; >
> > > Nick Olsen
> > > Network Operations
> > > (855) FLSPEED x106
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > From: "Alexander Lopez" <
com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM
> To: "Alex Balashov" <abalas...@evaristesys.com>, "voiceops@voiceops.org"
> <voiceops@voiceops.org>
> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relativ
obile. And that basically any other
> > > > > carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days.
> > > > > Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting.
> > > > >
> > > > > I figure they all e
f of Alex
> Balashov <abalas...@evaristesys.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:02 PM
> > To: Alexander Lopez; voiceops@voiceops.org
> > Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
> >
> > One would think that the incentives would diverge depending on whet
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
Subject: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
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
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
.) 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
*Subject:* [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
How do cellular
From: VoiceOps [voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Adam Vocks
[adam.vo...@cticomputers.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 1:32 PM
To: Paul Timmins; voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
Forget I said anything. You guys are talking about something
ers.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 4:24pm
To: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com>, voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
Our landline ports are instantaneous. (Or so we think.) It’s always been that
way for us. I didn’t know there was any ot
+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
...@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Paul
Timmins
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:28 PM
To: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
If both carriers have a good business relationship and are willing to
write matching orders in the NPAC (winning carrier makes the
subscriptions
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
between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human
interaction.
Original message
From: Alex Balashov <abalas...@evaristesys.com>
Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
This does
ent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:02 PM
To: Alexander Lopez; voiceops@voiceops.org
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
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 -
14 / car...@race.com / http://www.race.com
>
>
>
> From: VoiceOps <voiceops-boun...@voiceops.org> on behalf of Alex Balashov
> <abalas...@evaristesys.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:02 PM
> To: Alexander Lopez; voiceops@v
23 matches
Mail list logo
