[VoiceOps] [External] Re: 9-8-8 dialing when an outside line access code (9) is being used

[Carlos Alvarez]

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 3:46 PM Nathan Anderson via VoiceOps <
voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:

>
> Exactly & here we are in complete agreement.  Carlos seems to be
> approaching this discussion from a perspective where modern endpoints
> are ubiquitous, which is fine and all, but it's simply not reality.
> The number of old key systems and PBXes out in the wild that are still
> in active use is not inconsequential and cannot be ignored.  We
> routinely come in to a new customer's facilities *only* to replace
> existing dialtone, because all they are after is better pricing /
> better support / etc. and their existing phone system "still works fine
> and we have no desire to forklift it out at present,
> thank-you-very-much".  This often means handing off to it via
> multi-port ATA or (best-case but rare) PRI.


Right, and their switch traps the 9 so you don't have to route it.  I may
be mistaken, but thought the original question was about routing on a
modern switch, where the 9 is not relevant.

Hah well (genuinely) good for you.  IME it is hard to break people of
> some of these habits.  And without the outside line prefix, those who
> insist on picking up the handset first to get the (simulated) dialtone
> have to face the interminable dialing timeouts.  I suppose you just
> take the position that if they want to avoid that, it's a simple matter
> of being willing to change how one does things, and that's how you've
> re-trained end users, but I guess we just tend to get the stubborn
> complainers?...
>

I explain to them what happened to the buggy whip makers.  Seriously,
coddling the lazy is bad for us all.

Do your users still dial 9 from their fax machines?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20220718/0ae75dcf/attachment.htm>