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

Hunter Fuller hf0002+nanog at uah.edu
Mon Jul 18 21:26:12 EDT 2022

I'm hearing what you are saying, but I don't understand it. As I said,
988 is the first problem we have had, and thus it is the first
indication that this is even unusual in the first place. I could see
why you would find no reason to do it greenfield but I don't see the
motivation to rip it out. That's why I ask what other problem it has,
or what other reason there is to consider it outdated.
(Aside from "it was initially done for a reason that is no longer
relevant" - that does not hold water to me because phone numbers
themselves exist for the same reason. If we invented VoIP today,
everyone would use SIP URIs only, so it would be the same as your
email address.)

Hunter Fuller (they)
Router Jockey
+1 256 824 5331

Office of Information Technology
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
Network Engineering

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 7:40 PM Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps
<voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 4:45 PM Hunter Fuller via VoiceOps <voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
>> I hate to tell y'all this, but not only do my users dial 9 from their
>> faxes to get out, they also fax internally (interdepartmentally) with
>> some frequency. So, yes, these users dial 4 digits from their fax
>> machines.
> I um...man.  I so wish I was confident that you're kidding.  I fear you're not.
>> first time we have ever had any issue with it; then at what point
>> exactly were we "supposed to" have "seen the light" and migrated away
>> from it? And what value would it have brought us at that time?
> I didn't see anyone here saying you were wrong.  But I do think most would say it's time to get away from old ways.
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

More information about the VoiceOps mailing list