That's true if the ILEC has an agreement with the tandem provider.
There are some little ILECs that have their own tandem and refuse
to use the big ILEC tandem provider! You have to look at the
routing of the ILEC switch in the LERG to figure that out. Mary
Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-771-7868
(temporary) Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2018-08-29 11:38 AM, Paul
Timmins wrote: > You don't actually have to establish connectivity
to all ILECs in an > area, even if you are porting out numbers
from their ratecenters. The > ILECs already have to have a way to
reach any other tandem in the LATA > so as long as you have an LRN
homed on A tandem in the area, and port > your numbers to that,
you're good to go. > > The ILECs don't LIKE it, but if we cared
what they truly liked we'd > all just leave the market. > > On Aug
29, 2018 12:33, BackUP Telecom Consulting > wrote: > > When there
are multiple ILECs in a LATA like in LA - LATA 730, you > would >
set up an interconnection point with each ILEC. So you'd have one
for > the AT&T areas and one for the old Verizon areas. When you
have trunks > > to both carriers in the LATA, you can use your own
network to switch > traffic from the one LATA to the other LATA,
but you can't deliver it > to > the ILEC and expect them to hand
it off to the other ILEC. It would > work > the same with the
third party providers.......as long as they have a > connection in
both ILEC areas, then they can use their own network to > deliver
the traffic from the one ILEC area to the other ILEC area. > >
Mary Lou Carey > > BackUP Telecom Consulting > > Office:
615-771-7868 (temporary) > > Cell: 615-796-1111 > > On 2018-08-28
08:18 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: >> I thought everyone connected to
the ILEC-hosted tandem responsible > for >> the rate centers where
the number blocks were assigned, but that > seems >> to not always
be the case when there are multiple ILEC-hosted > tandems >> in a
LATA. >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing
Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com >> >> ------------------------- >> >>
FROM: "Erik" >> TO: "Mike Hammett" >> CC: voiceops@voiceops.org >>
SENT: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 7:25:40 PM >> SUBJECT: Re:
[VoiceOps] LNP, tandems, etc. >> >> Most providers simply connect
to the tandem at the ILEC. The end >> office transit termination
and origination cost is SO LOW that it >> doesn't make since to
have a switch or access point at the end > office. >> Since most
things are ILEC if not all are VOIP everything is coming >> from a
centralize switch point. Hopefully all the 1970's billing >>
methods will disappear. >> >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:00 PM,
Mike Hammett >> wrote: >> >>> Meaning if I thought were true? I
had just assumed that Inteliquent >>> did have the connections to
every tandem in the LATAs they serve, >>> given that (my thought)
that you could only port numbers on the > same >>> tandem, so
universal coverage would require connections to every >>> tandem.
We're actually looking at someone like Inteliquent to > expand >>>
our footprint. >>> >>> So I'm supposed to be connected to every
tandem in my LATA? In my >>> LATA, there are only two (I believe),
but some LATAs (like Chicago) >>> have several. I'm supposed to
drag a DS1 (or use Inteliquent, etc. >>> if available) to connect
to each one, even if I don't provide >>> service in the rate
centers traditionally served by that tandem? It >>> seems like
Comcast threw a dart at a dart board in choosing which >>> tandem
to connect to vs. going with the one that everyone else in >>>
that town uses. >>> >>> So then I could port a number from any
rate center in my LATA (say >>> Savanna) and point it to my LRN,
living off of a tandem switch that >>> the Savanna ILEC isn't
connected to (from my outside world >>> perspective)? Is there
even the LATA constraint? Given the porting >>> limitations I had
experienced in the VoIP world, I assumed it was a >>>
tandem-by-tandem basis. >>> >>> So the LERG shows which tandem I
need to send traffic to if I want >>> to talk to them, but they
could send their outbound calls to a >>> different tandem? My
current customer complaint is for calls that >>> we're sending to
Comcast, apparently homed off of the other tandem. >>> >>> If
everyone is supposed to be on every tandem, then why can't the >>>
tandem I'm on just accept the calls I'm sending to Comcast, since
Comcast should be there? Obviously me not being on the other
tandem >>> would affect inbound traffic to me. >>> >>> Is there
another service I should be paying Frontier for to get me >>> to
the other tandem with some value-add service? I know CenturyLink
hops through almost every town going that way (former
LightCore and >>> others before route). Frontier or CenturyLink
may be able to get me >>> a DS1 to the other tandem if I need
that. >>> >>> I'm aware that I could still be completely missing
the mark. >>> >>> BTW: Thanks for TelcoData. I subscribed a long
time ago, but > haven't >>> for many ages. >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike
Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>>
http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> Midwest Internet Exchange >>>
http://www.midwest-ix.com >>> >>> ------------------------- >>>
FROM: "Paul Timmins" >>> TO: "Mike Hammett" >>> CC:
voiceops@voiceops.org >>> SENT: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 5:19:11
PM >>> SUBJECT: Re: [VoiceOps] LNP, tandems, etc. >>> >>> If that
were true, you wouldn't be able to use inteliquent (et al) >>> as
your access tandem. Everyone is supposed to be directly or >>>
indirectly connected to every tandem in the LATA (which you can't
independently verify, as telcodata and the LERG both show >>>
terminating tandem information to reach that end office, not what
tandems the end office is hooked to to terminate calls. >>>
On Aug 28, 2018 17:47, Mike Hammett wrote: >>> >>> I thought
you had to be on the same tandem to port a number, but >>> with
what our tandem operator (Frontier) is telling me, this isn't >>>
the case. >>> >>> Comcast ported a number from us in town A. The
LRN they pointed to >>> is based in town B (per TelcoData). The
tandem generally used by >>> carriers in both towns is based in
town B. Naturally, we send >>> traffic to that tandem. >>> >>> The
operator of that tandem is telling us that the LRN is actually >>>
homed off of a different tandem in our LATA (operated by >>>
CenturyLink) in town C. Unfortunately, I can't corroborate this
information with TelcoData the only rate center I see off of
that >>> tandem in TelcoData is an AT&T town next door. >>> >>>
Where can I read up authoritatively on the porting requirements >
that >>> would apply to this and related bits of info I should
know? >>> >>> I'm checking on our LERG access as I know that has
the > authoritative >>> information, but I don't have that access
at the moment. Maybe > we're >>> not subscribed to it. >>> >>>
Number NPA-NXX in town A: >>> >> >
