Matt Larsen - Lists wrote:
Lets take a step back...
I never wrote anything about offering VOIP or 911 or E911 - I merely
mentioned selling an Asterisk based phone system that is capable of
redirecting long distance calls over VOIP. The customer that I
mentioned is not getting their long
One interesting question would be what happens if the POTS line is down,
but Matt's wonderful wireless network is up? ;) The customer would have
voice service but no 911... Sorry, I just couldn't resist.
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
Matt Larsen - Lists wrote:
Lets take a step
You may be able to hold them to it later but you are still ultimately
responsible.
If a CPA screws up your taxes, you are still liable for that filing.
You may have a case against them that you may or may not win in court.
But you will still have to pay back taxes, and interest at best when
Actually, this is a real good question. Who would be liable when the
customer picks up the phone and dials 911 and nothing happens?
Sam Tetherow wrote:
One interesting question would be what happens if the POTS line is
down, but Matt's wonderful wireless network is up? ;) The customer
My personal opinion is that if the customer signs a waiver that they
understand you are not providing 911 support and that if they dial 911
they get a message that says that 911 is not available from this device
then you should be covered. I KNOW that this is contrary to the law,
I'm just
Remember, you could still have the costs of defending
that position in a court.
- Original Message -
From: Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 2:27 PM
Subject: Re: 911 compliance (was Re: [WISPA] VoIP
On Jun 24, 2006, at 10:15 PM, Butch Evans wrote:
If you look at what Matt Larsen posted, you will see that (as I
have stated twice and he stated originally) that his PBX SUPPORTS
E911. You are either forgetting that or ignoring it. Here is his
post again:
Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: 911 compliance (was Re: [WISPA] VoIP as a service
offering -Skype,Yahoo, MS)
Tom,
I have to go
Matt,
Do you really believe that? I know the comments you made in regard to 911
compliance I countered with facts I can backup. Therefore, your ideas on
911 compliance were either just made up or worse, your lawyer agreed with
you on them.
You are making a gross misunderstanding.
I did
Subject: Re: 911 compliance (was Re: [WISPA] VoIP as a service offering
-Skype,Yahoo, MS)
Tom,
I have to go with Matt on this.
I am on a lot of lists, so they get confused, but I have seen way too
many people ask for advice on listservs that should have gone to either
a CPA, state revenue
On Jun 23, 2006, at 4:28 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
Many on this list like to just make things up as opposed to
getting an actual legal opinion from a practicing attorney that
specializes in this field.
I'm not aware of that going on much at all on this list, its just
not true.
Do you
Dearman
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:wireless-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 4:43 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: 911 compliance (was Re: [WISPA] VoIP as a service
offering
-Skype,Yahoo, MS)
Tom,
I have to go with Matt
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Matt Liotta wrote:
Your agree with Larsen for what reason?
Did you know that currently five states require PBXs of all
varieties to support E911? In fact, only three states specifically
state that PBX vendors
If you look at what Matt Larsen posted, you will see that
On Jun 23, 2006, at 12:20 AM, Butch Evans wrote:
The example Matt listed was a business that purchased a phone
system. This phone system happens to be an Asterisk system that
has a POTS line terminated in it. Some traffic is routed via VoIP
offerings available on the net, while other
Message -
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: 911 compliance (was Re: [WISPA] VoIP as a service
offering -Skype, Yahoo, MS)
On Jun 23, 2006, at 12:20 AM, Butch Evans wrote:
The example Matt listed
Tom,
I have to go with Matt on this.
I am on a lot of lists, so they get confused, but I have seen way too
many people ask for advice on listservs that should have gone to either
a CPA, state revenue department, or an attorney.
You have no real idea who is replying. He could be giving you
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, Matt Liotta wrote:
That is incorrect. A POTS line will only be able to provide ANI/ALI
information as configured by the LEC providing the POTS line, which
will not match the subscriber's call that you are routing through
it.
However, according to what Matt Larsen
Anyone who thinks that providing a POTS line along with VoIP service
for 911 compliance either has read the order and/or has checked with
council. If you provide any VoIP service your VOIP must be 911
compliant as per the order. Any other services you may or others may
provide to the
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 7:55 AM
Subject: 911 compliance (was Re: [WISPA] VoIP as a service offering -
Skype,Yahoo, MS)
Anyone who thinks that providing a POTS line along with VoIP service for
911 compliance either has read
Tom DeReggi wrote:
However, I believe it is allowed, that if at the provider's switch,
they intercept 911 calls, and redirect to a pots line connected to the
providers switch, it complies.
That is incorrect. What gives you that impression?
So if you ahve a local regional switch and
Horsecrap. All I am selling is the phone system.
Matt Larsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Matt Liotta wrote:
Anyone who thinks that providing a POTS line along with VoIP service
for 911 compliance either has read the order and/or has checked with
council. If you provide any VoIP service your VOIP
compliance (was Re: [WISPA] VoIP as a service
offering -Skype, Yahoo, MS)
Tom DeReggi wrote:
However, I believe it is allowed, that if at the provider's switch, they
intercept 911 calls, and redirect to a pots line connected to the
providers switch, it complies.
That is incorrect. What gives you
Tom DeReggi wrote:
Why can't I write a script in Linux/Asterix that says, if Source phone
number equals my client, and destiantion phone number equalls 911,
move this call to POTS Line A, a POTS line with an area code/phone
xxx-xxx appropriaite for the region where that customer resides.
(was Re: [WISPA] VoIP as a service
offering -Skype,Yahoo, MS)
Tom DeReggi wrote:
Why can't I write a script in Linux/Asterix that says, if Source phone
number equals my client, and destiantion phone number equalls 911, move
this call to POTS Line A, a POTS line with an area code/phone xxx-xxx
24 matches
Mail list logo
