redelegate 4.4.e164.arpa anyone? C
Simon Woodhead wrote: > Hi Darren > > I wouldn’t presume the industry is anything other than desperate for a > sensible solution to porting. The present embarrassment is causing > massive consumer harm and facilitating re-monopolisation when combined > with other rocks Ofcom is reluctant to look under. > > There’s a number of ways of interpreting the last attempt to do so, > but that industry doesn’t want it is not the correct one IMHO. I > believe you’d find a lot of support in attempting to do it > collaboratively. > > Cheers > W > > -- > > > SIMON WOODHEAD > > Founder and CEO > > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > <mailto:[email protected]> > > +44 330 122 3000 > > www.simwood.com <https://www.simwood.com> > > <https://www.simwood.com> > > Simwood eSMS Limited, Simwood House, Cube M4 Business Park, Old > Gloucester Road, Bristol, BS16 1FX, United Kingdom > > Registered in England 03379831 > > Simwood Inc., 301 Union St. #21445, Seattle, WA 98111, United States > > Simwood > > > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:37, Neil J. McRae <[email protected]> wrote: > > Darren, > > I think once upon a time that would have been a valuable thing to > do but in today’s glorious digital world - let’s face it; phone > numbers are the telecommunications equivalent of Woolworth’s. > > > > You want a phone number after you’ve tried to whatsapp, facebook > messenger or email- you google it; you use a phone number often - > you store it in your phone and forget it; or someone miss-calls > you so you can store it, you want to phone your grandkids and you > use facetime… The only folks who use phone numbers are irritating > sales people who have your number from linked in and want to know > if you are going to some bizarre conference in Middlesbrough or > that they have a solution for GDPR (!) > > > > In my personal view we should be figuring out how we rid the > planet of phone numbers. > > > > Cheers, > > Neil. > > > > On 22/05/2018 09:26, "Darren Storer" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > Personally I have always been disappointed by industry resistance > to an "all call query" (central IN) number portability solution, > as implemented in Holland (COIN) or even an intermediate "query on > release strategy". The lack of a central number portability > solution makes legislation tricky to keep up with and impacts the > user experience. > > https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/content/number-portability > > > > Regards > > > Darren > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*uknof <[email protected]> on behalf of Neil > J. McRae <[email protected]> > *Sent:* 22 May 2018 07:47 > *To:* Tim Bray > *Cc:* [email protected] > *Subject:* EXTERNAL:Re: [uknof] BT Phone Number renumbering > > > > Emails like this make me chuckle when we are the biggest VoIP > provider in the country ;) > > We typically don’t port numbers or use premium rate numbers in the > way being requested on the PSTN for a variety of reasons - the > biggest one being the ability to make inbound signalling work > which requires a lot of effort for single numbers and causes > billing and other challenges and a lot of these are mostly not > within our control. And yes we’ve started to path to turn off PSTN. > > Neil. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On 21 May 2018, at 15:26, Tim Bray <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > >> On 21/05/18 11:24, David Derrick wrote: > >> > >> Why faff about getting the pretty number on the PSTN line? I assume > >> the Tamar Telecom number is a VoIP one, why not use the VoIP service > >> properly? Or port the number to a VoIP provider if it isn't. > > > > > > I suspect, in theory, porting a number into BT is possible. I > suspect, > > in theory, it is possible without the broadband line being > disconnected > > in the process. You might even be able to migrate the broadband or > > convert to FTTC in the future without a mess up. > > > > I suspect in practice, you are asking for something not done very > often. > > That nobody really knows how to do. And that it will give you hassle > > forever. > > > > Why not just leave it on a forward to the existing PSTN number, > and pay > > the less than 1p a minute. (and hopefully a provider with no > minimum > > call charge). > > > > IMHO, you are much better having the number you really care about > > sitting with a VoIP provider (as in, not BT). > > > > I bet with the right voice provider, you could even Carrier > preselect on > > outbound calls, and set the CLI to the one you want. Again, will > cost a > > little bit, but not much in the whole scheme of things. > > > > > > I also have a view point. Ported numbers never seem to be quite as > > reliable (for inbound calls) as a native number from your > provider's (or > > their preferred upstream) allocation. > > > > ***** > > > > Why did you order a BT-Net line? I presume not related to above? > > > > > > Tim > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > ****************************************************************************************************************** > For more information visit www.ofcom.org.uk > > This email (and any attachments) is confidential and intended for > the use of the addressee only. > > If you have received this email in error please notify the > originator of the message and delete it from your system. > > This email has been scanned for viruses. However, you open any > attachments at your own risk. > > Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual > sender and do not represent the views or opinions of Ofcom unless > expressly stated otherwise. > > ****************************************************************************************************************** > -- Christian de Larrinaga @ FirstHand ------------------------- +44 7989 386778 [email protected]
