[VoiceOps] TF number ported out/re-assigned without authorization

Carlos Alvarez caalvarez at gmail.com
Tue Mar 14 17:10:31 EDT 2023

On Mar 14, 2023 at 2:03:17 PM, Peter Beckman <beckman at angryox.com> wrote:

> We've also put numbers into production that our carrier provided, only to
> find out they should not have been in their inventory at all.

I’ve learned this lesson, hence the test calls.  But this is a new one on
me; how often should we have to test all of our numbers??

We went as far as sending test calls or SMS messages to each number in our
> inventory about once every 2 weeks, and generate a report of numbers that
> have failed the test (we didn't receive the inbound call or text). This has
> helped us detect issues earlier, but not prevent them.

That’s uglier than a Pontiac Aztek.

I just hope thinQ can handle this.  Looking at our call records vs their TF
number history, it’s clear when it was ours, then taken, then given out
again.  I believe someone else on the list suggested that previous
ownership is superior to current ownership?  If it comes down to that,
anyone know the process to enforce it?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20230314/337ece6c/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the VoiceOps mailing list