[cisco-voip] federal NRO number assignment rules ?

[Dark Fiber]

I agree 911 needs to be addressed, and believe me it is.  911 is not
our issue in this case, steps have been taken to ensure that the
correct address is applied for 911 calls and routed to the correct
PSAP.

The issue and question we are facing is simply in determining whether
its ok to assign a user a DID who is located in a area serviced by a
different NPA-XXX



On 8/29/07, charles george <cisco1.charles at gmail.com> wrote:
> users with Cisco phones and DID's from the corporate office who work
> remotely.
>
> Probably has to do with the fact that if someone dials 911 and the DID's
> state that the address for these DID's are at 1 location, the remote users
> will not get help when they call 911 from their Voip phone.  Emergency
> Sevices will go to the address  for the DID not the location of the Call.
>
> They (Emergency Service) will not know.
>
> Might need enhanced 911 for this to comply.
>
> I may be wrong, but right away Federal and remote and DID's this comes to my
> mind with these combination of words.
>
>
> On 8/29/07, Dark Fiber <d4rkf1ber at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Recently I asked the group about an internal issue I am facing
> > regarding how we are leveraging DID's and central PRI's.
> >
> > Basically, we have asked for and recieved a block of DID's that all
> > fall into one range.  Those are all tied to a couple of PRI's that
> > come into a central location.
> >
> > We have not only assigned DID's to employees who work out of the
> > central location, but through the magic of VoIP "ohhh ahhh" we have
> > users with Cisco phones and DID's from the corporate office who work
> > remotely.
> >
> > Nothing new here, and nothing I have not seen done every place I have
> > worked out in the last oh 10 years or so.
> >
> > However for the first time I am at a company who has some lawyer /
> > regulatory person on staff who is questioning whether this is legal or
> > not.
> >
> > The current statement from this person experiencing concern is,
> > "compliance with federal NRO number assignment rules".
> >
> > Sounds awfully legal and well thats what I asked for.  I previously
> > told this person that for the most part everyone I have polled
> > regarding these concerns have basically agreed in saying its very
> > common to do this and if it is illegal then show me where and what
> > makes it illegal?  So thats what they replied with, and well I am
> > googling and trying to make sense of what I read but I can't say I
> > fully understand it.
> >
> > Anyone know more about this and understand the implications and how it
> > affects a business doing what I am doing internally for employee
> > phones?
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
>
>