[VoiceOps] Growing difficulties porting DIDs out of major VoIP carriers

[Carlos Alvarez]

I agree with Ryan.  We don't have any ports to cellular ever, and nearly
zero port outs at all (we don't lose customers).  But during acquisition,
we encounter messes all the time.  During a recent port from Onvoy to
Bandwidth, we had a bunch of numbers with incorrect data on Onvoy (not our
doing).  People who came to use from Telesphere/Onvoy have crazy data like
showing the address for Telesphere themselves, or the address of the Vonage
datacenter downtown.

There are also varying levels of "stickler" for data.  I'm in the middle of
porting in several numbers that belong to the same company, but are with
various carriers.  The submissions are identical, some fail and some get
ported.  But I'm learning that the data is the same on all of them.  In
particular, some demand that the authorized signer must match, and some do
not.

AT&T and Verizon both have some issues in their internal data as far as
both phone numbers and IMEIs.  The problems seem to stem from past ports
that didn't get incorporated into their data.


On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:10 AM Ryan Delgrosso <ryandelgrosso at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I believe this has more to do with shoddy record keeping than anything.
> Most voip carriers will port their own numbers around multiple times (using
> scale as leverage to get better deals playing carriers off each other).
> When they do that its not uncommon for them to use the same info (like
> their office address) versus the actual customer info, or their address
> parser code to translate between carrier A's system and carrier B's system
> mangles something, or there has been some M&A activity and the merged
> databases have bad info.
>
> In the end the new recorded address is not predictable by the customer and
> is easily and frequently rejected.
>
> I am moving through a project right now to move numbers between carriers
> and have found my losing carrier has done exactly this.
>
> With the state of record keeping and lack of appreciable standards I'm
> shocked that the LNP system works at all.
> On 3/5/2019 8:41 AM, Oren Yehezkely wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am hoping that someone may be able to shed some light as to the
> difficulties mobile carriers have to port DIDs away from major VoIP
> carriers such as Bandwidth and Onvoy.
>
> The problem does not seem to be on the VoIP providers. In most of the
> cases, they do not even receive an LSR. The mobile carriers seem to be
> asking for a CSR multiple times but never submit an LSR, then they tell the
> EU that the port request has failed.
>
> In another case, when the DID is with Bandwidth, the ATT system tells the
> customer that the number is with LOCKED with Google Voice and cannot be
> ported. I wonder who builds these faulty systems for these corporations?
>
> Any advice is appreciated.
>
> Oren
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing listVoiceOps at voiceops.orghttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190305/b90b778f/attachment.html>