[VoiceOps] Unportable Numbers

[Paul Timmins]

(From the CLEC perspective)

In many states, your license states specific areas you are legally 
permitted to operate in, and many times this language says something to 
the effect of "The operating territories of AT&T and Frontier North, 
including but not limited to the following ratecenters..." with a huge 
list of ratecenters afterward.

Unless your CLEC has licensure in such a way to permit them to operate 
in the ILEC's territory, they won't have the requisite operating 
authority to perform the port. Even if there are no technical 
impediments for them to do so, number portability is only eligible for 
carriers who can legally operate as a CLEC in the area they are porting 
numbers from. Much like how a police officer from one city in a state 
isn't a police officer elsewhere in the state.

Once that is done, you generally have to have an interconnection 
agreement with the ILEC in the area that dictates how their calls will 
route to you, and how the calls are billed. This part can be waived by 
the ILEC, but I've only seen one do it so far. Is it necessary? No, I 
mean, the calls are already routing that way, right? It's not like their 
customers couldn't call you before.......

Once those are done, it's generally good practice to make sure people in 
that area can call 911. 911 selective router footprints don't always 
match service provider footprints. I've seen plenty of cases where 
frontier customers use AT&T selective routers, or vice versa.

After that, you generally feel comfortable letting customers know the 
area is open for service. Until then you're just asking for trouble.

On 10/19/2011 05:35 PM, Scott Berkman wrote:
>
> There is at least one rural iLEC in NE Georgia that is a PITA to work 
> with.  If nothing else, I've seen them require direct tandem trunking 
> (to their tandem) or else they will not deliver calls to ported out 
> TNs across the regular iLEC (ATT) tandem.
>
> I've always been interested in the legality of this since my 
> understanding of the FCC order is that it requires all LECs to allow 
> for porting without any loss of functionality to the end user.
>
> One option is of course to file a complaint with the FCC per the 
> following link:
>
> http://www.fcc.gov/complaints
>
>                 -Scott
>
> *From:*voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org 
> [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of *Rob Hutton
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 19, 2011 1:51 PM
> *To:* VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> *Subject:* [VoiceOps] Unportable Numbers
>
> We have a customer in Northeast Georgia that currently has their phone 
> service through an ILEC who I have been told will not sign the sharing 
> agreements with the underlying VOIP networks, and therefore no one 
> that I can find has any rate centers in that area. Also, the VOIP 
> carriers have not been willing to do a off network port request, which 
> when refused would allow me to continue forward on a complaint with 
> the regulatory bodies.
>
> The underlying VOIP network companies have told me that they have 
> Local Number Portability departments to work through this stuff, and I 
> need to work with my higher level carriers to get a case opened with 
> their LNP departments before they will talk to me. The higer level 
> carriers are telling me they don't know what to do because they have 
> never run into this before.
>
> Does anyone have any experience working through this mess?
>
> Thanks in advance for your help,
>
> Rob
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20111019/4f8a4449/attachment.html>