[VoiceOps] Unallocated Number Behavior
ivan.kovacevic at startelecom.ca
Fri Jul 11 10:54:47 EDT 2014
The standards would be very similar and well defined. ISP Telecom is
opening themselves up to a CRTC (FCC equivalent) complaint for
That being said, this is a pretty interesting (albeit non-standard) way to
deal with voice spammers and sequential dialers... may raise their costs
just enough to make voice spamming for Cruises, Interest rate reduction,
duct cleaning services etc unfeasible.
www.startelecom.ca | SIP Based Services for Contact Centers
From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Justin
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 8:17 PM
To: Jared Geiger
Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Unallocated Number Behavior
In the US, the FCC regulations, as well as most interconnection
agreements, generally codify a variety of Bellcore standards. Which are
reasonably clear about such things. Even more, one could make a pretty
good case for this as an example of access stimulation, without regard to
I can't speak to Canada.
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Jared Geiger <jared at compuwizz.net>
> Are there rules/guidelines on how an unallocated number should respond?
> We are seeing unallocated numbers on a Canadian LEC, ISP Telecom, that
> in the 183 response it plays back "Unallocated Number. Please check
> the number and try again. Unallocated Number. Please check the number
and try again."
> then the call answers with "Hello" and plays music on hold indefinitely.
> A sample is 1-289-999-9348.
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
VoiceOps mailing list
VoiceOps at voiceops.org
More information about the VoiceOps