<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000'>I'm looking for one part (perhaps even two parts) educational and one part get it fixed.<br><br>Fixing it could be as simple as not sending sending that traffic to that tandem anymore. Easiest and cheapest (unless volume dictates otherwise) way, though perhaps not the best. I've also made inquiries to Frontier as to what services they have that could help solve this, be it some value-add to take it to that tandem for me anyway, a DS1 to that other tandem, etc. I've also reached out to others (including Centurylink) for quoting out that transport. Probably need some other paperwork as well (not sure if we have an ICA with them or not, I'm guessing not), but I'm sure they'll tell me what I need to connect when I ask to connect.<br><br>I'm one of those guys that likes to understand a situation vs. outsourcing from the beginning. Sure, outsourcing may end up being the best way of implementing it, but I can't just always take everyone at their word and then not understand what's going on when things go sideways.<br><br>The summary seems to be that Comcast did something wrong (or at least unconventionally) and now I have to do extra work\expense to work around it.<br><br><div><span name="x"></span><br><br>-----<br>Mike Hammett<br>Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>http://www.ics-il.com<br><br><br><br>Midwest Internet Exchange<br>http://www.midwest-ix.com<br><br><span name="x"></span><br></div><br><hr id="zwchr"><div style="color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>From: </b>"Adam Vocks" <Adam.Vocks@cticomputers.com><br><b>To: </b>"Mike Hammett" <voiceops@ics-il.net>, paul@timmins.net<br><b>Cc: </b>voiceops@voiceops.org<br><b>Sent: </b>Thursday, August 30, 2018 8:04:06 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>RE: [VoiceOps] LNP, tandems, etc.<br><br>Hi Mike, if you have money to throw at the problem, I think I'd just<br>hire Mary to track down and fix the problem for you. She's obviously<br>knowledgeable, probably has enough contacts and is now familiar with<br>your problem.<br><br>Adam<br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces@voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Mike<br>Hammett<br>Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 7:17 AM<br>To: paul@timmins.net<br>Cc: voiceops@voiceops.org<br>Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] LNP, tandems, etc.<br><br>1) How do I find an appropriate contact to ask?<br>2) From what Mary has said, Comcast is doing it wrong in my area. I<br>suppose it's useful to know how something is SUPPOSED to be done and<br>acknowledge that it very well could be very different in production.<br><br><br><br>-----<br>Mike Hammett<br>Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>http://www.ics-il.com<br><br><br><br>Midwest Internet Exchange<br>http://www.midwest-ix.com<br><br><br><br>----- Original Message -----<br>From: paul@timmins.net<br>To: voiceops@ics-il.net, voiceops@voiceops.org,<br>marylou@backuptelecom.com<br>Cc: voiceops@voiceops.org, marylou@backuptelecom.com<br>Sent: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 21:04:33 -0500 (CDT)<br>Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] LNP, tandems, etc.<br><br><div dir="auto">The block owner often has a connection to the ILEC<br>tandem for their block in that range, but that's not always<br>necessary (I don't have any ilec FGD groups in the Chicago LATA, so<br>it's not universally necessary).<div dir="auto"><br></div><div<br>dir="auto">The only way to know for certain is to check the LERG or just<br>ask the carrier, which is what I usually do because I don't like<br>giving money to iconnectiv, since they tend to like to send me legally<br>cartoonish Cease and Descists every few years for the last<br>decade.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div<br>class="gmail_quote">On Aug 29, 2018 21:49, Mike Hammett<br><voiceops@ics-il.net> wrote:<br><blockquote><html><head><style>p {<br>margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style="font-family:<br>arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000">So then in<br>my situation:<br> https://www.telcodata.us/search-area-code-exchange-detail?npa=815&<br>amp;exchange=901<br><br><br>Comcast has 815-901 as<br> well as<br> 815-901-0. Verizon Wireless has 1k-8k. 9k I guess would be either not<br>provisioned or default back to Comcast because they have the 10k block.<br>Because they have the parent 10k block, are they then required to have a<br>connection to the tandem I'm on anyway? The 1k block I now<br>understand could be elsewhere, but the 10k?<br><br>Interesting that<br>AT&T U-Verse voice isn't on legacy AT&T<br>infrastructure.<br><br><div><span></span><br><br>-----<br>Mike<br>Hammett<br>Intelligent Computing<br>Solutions<br>http://www.ics-il.com<br><br><br><br>Midwest Internet<br>Exchange<br>http://www.midwest-ix.com<br><br><span></span><br></div><br><br><hr id="zwchr"><div<br>style="color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:n<br>one;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>From:<br></b>paul@timmins.net<br><b>To: </b>voiceops@ics-il.net,<br>voiceops@voiceops.org, marylou@backuptelecom.com<br><b>Cc:<br></b>voiceops@voiceops.org, marylou@backuptelecom.com<br><b>Sent:<br></b>Wednesday,<br> August <br> 29, 2018 7:08:15 PM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [VoiceOps] LNP, tandems,<br>etc.<br><br><div dir="auto">Thousands blocks are basically just a fancy<br>LNP operation. Your tandem homing has to follow 10k blocks, and the 1k<br>blocks are basically mass ported to your LRN. Even if the numbers are<br>usually homed a certain way because they are in a ratecenter, they<br>won't be in this case because they are ported numbers and supposed<br>to be routed to your LRN. Example would be the Detroit LATA where there<br>are about 6 or so AT&T and other tandems. I'm homed off<br>WBFDMIMN20T. The local carrier has local/local toll trunks to me all<br>over the place, but all intercarrier calls and out of area calls other<br>than local traffic from AT&T LEC comes through my LRN 248-574-7678<br>off WBFDMIMN20T. This saves me from having to create FGD trunking ports<br>to all the other tandems in the region, only the barely used local/intra<br>trunking from AT&T ILEC, who has moved most customers to their<br>uverse VoIP<br> affilia<br> te here, and those don't use the local/intra trunks either.<div<br>dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It lowers my capex and opex having<br>potentially over provisioned/underutilized trunking all over the place,<br>saves numbers and decreases the need for splits and overlays, and even<br>saves at&t money. Only people who lose out are ribbon and metaswitch<br>(and whoever supports at&ts 5ESS and EWSD deployments) on licensing<br>and support costs for unneeded channels.</div></div><div<br>class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Aug 29, 2018 19:51,<br>Mike Hammett <voiceops@ics-il.net> wrote:<br><blockquote><style>p<br>{ margin: 0; }</style><div style="font-family:<br>arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000"><font<br>face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:<br>10pt;">"</span></font><span style="font-family: "Times New<br>Roman"; font-size: medium; background-color: rgb(255, 255,<br>255);">they give you market entry without the technic<br> al need <br> to establish extra homing arrangements that aren't beneficial to<br>you."</span><div><br></div><div>Could you elaborate on<br>that?<br><br><div style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;<br>font-size: 10pt;"><span></span><br><br>-----<br>Mike<br>Hammett<br>Intelligent Computing<br>Solutions<br>http://www.ics-il.com<br><br><br><br>Midwest Internet<br>Exchange<br>http://www.midwest-ix.com<br><br><span></span><br></div><br><br><hr id="zwchr" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;<br>font-size: 10pt;"><div style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;<br>font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-weight: normal; font-style:<br>normal; text-decoration: none;"><b>From: </b>paul@timmins.net<br><b>To:<br></b>marylou@backuptelecom.com, ptimmins@clearrate.com,<br>voiceops@voiceops.org<br><b>Cc: </b>voiceops@voiceops.org,<br>ptimmins@clearrate.com<br><b>Sent: </b>Wednesday, August 29, 2018<br>6:05:39 PM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [VoiceOps] LNP, tandems,<br>etc.<br><br><div dir="auto">I've had some i<br> nteresti<br> ng arguments with other carriers regarding their obligation to connect<br>to us. Oh, you aren't connected where I'm homed? Go order<br>connectivity then.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">They have a<br>little more power to make demands when you have more than 24 standing<br>calls to them, but by and large with these stubborn providers we never<br>do, and when they have complained i've given them a location they<br>can install 1 way trunks to me at (as I have no desire to terminate<br>traffic to them directly), and they always balk and find some other way<br>of dealing with it because it was all well and good until it was their<br>money they were spending instead of mine. The trick ends up being to<br>never do 10k blocks when you don't have to. Thousands blocks<br>aren't just great for number consolidation, they give you market<br>entry without the technical need to establish extra homing arrangements<br>that aren't beneficial to you. Sure sometimes you're the guy who<br>has to own<br> the 10k<br> block, bu<blockquote><p>That's true if the ILEC has an agreement<br>with the tandem provider. There <br>are some little ILECs that have their own tandem and refuse to use the <br>big ILEC tandem provider! You have to look at the routing of the ILEC <br>switch in the LERG to figure that out.<br><br>Mary Lou Carey<br><br>BackUP Telecom Consulting<br><br>Office: 615-771-7868 (temporary)<br><br>Cell: 615-796-1111<br><br>On 2018-08-29 11:38 AM, Paul Timmins wrote:<br>> You don't actually have to establish connectivity to all ILECs<br>in an<br>> area, even if you are porting out numbers from their ratecenters.<br>The<br>> ILECs already have to have a way to reach any other tandem in the<br>LATA<br>> so as long as you have an LRN homed on A tandem in the area, and<br>port<br>> your numbers to that, you're good to go.<br>> <br>> The ILECs don't LIKE it, but if we cared what they truly liked<br>we'd<br>> all just leave the market.<br>> <br>> On Aug 29, 2018 12:33, BackUP Telecom Consulting<br>> wrote:<br>> <br>> When there are multiple ILECs in a LATA like in LA - LATA 730, you<br>> would<br>> set up an interconnection point with each ILEC. So you'd have<br>one for<br>> the AT&T areas and one for the old Verizon areas. When you have<br>trunks<br>> <br>> to both carriers in the LATA, you can use your own network to<br>switch<br>> traffic from the one LATA to the other LATA, but you can't<br>deliver it<br>> to<br>> the ILEC and expect them to hand it off to the other ILEC. It would<br>> work<br>> the same with the third party providers.......as long as they have<br>a<br>> connection in both ILEC areas, then they can use their own network<br>to<br>> deliver the traffic from the one ILEC area to the other ILEC area.<br>> <br>> Mary Lou Carey<br>> <br>> BackUP Telecom Consulting<br>> <br>> Office: 615-771-7868 (temporary)<br>> <br>> Cell: 615-796-1111<br>> <br>> On 2018-08-28 08:18 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:<br>>> I thought everyone connected to the ILEC-hosted tandem<br>responsible<br>> for<br>>> the rate centers where the number blocks were assigned, but<br>that<br>> seems<br>>> to not always be the case when there are multiple ILEC-hosted<br>> tandems<br>>> in a LATA.<br>>> <br>>> -----<br>>> Mike Hammett<br>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>>> http://www.ics-il.com<br>>> <br>>> Midwest Internet Exchange<br>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com<br>>> <br>>> -------------------------<br>>> <br>>> FROM: "Erik" <br>>> TO: "Mike Hammett" <br>>> CC: voiceops@voiceops.org<br>>> SENT: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 7:25:40 PM<br>>> SUBJECT: Re: [VoiceOps] LNP, tandems, etc.<br>>> <br>>> Most providers simply connect to the tandem at the ILEC. The<br>end<br>>> office transit termination and origination cost is SO LOW that<br>it<br>>> doesn't make since to have a switch or access point at the<br>end<br>> office.<br>>> Since most things are ILEC if not all are VOIP everything is<br>coming<br>>> from a centralize switch point. Hopefully all the 1970's<br>billing<br>>> methods will disappear.<br>>> <br>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Mike Hammett <br>>> wrote:<br>>> <br>>>> Meaning if I thought were true? I had just assumed that<br>Inteliquent<br>>>> did have the connections to every tandem in the LATAs they<br>serve,<br>>>> given that (my thought) that you could only port numbers on<br>the<br>> same<br>>>> tandem, so universal coverage would require connections to<br>every<br>>>> tandem. We're actually looking at someone like<br>Inteliquent to<br>> expand<br>>>> our footprint.<br>>>> <br>>>> So I'm supposed to be connected to every tandem in my<br>LATA? In my<br>>>> LATA, there are only two (I believe), but some LATAs (like<br>Chicago)<br>>>> have several. I'm supposed to drag a DS1 (or use<br>Inteliquent, etc.<br>>>> if available) to connect to each one, even if I don't<br>provide<br>>>> service in the rate centers traditionally served by that<br>tandem? It<br>>>> seems like Comcast threw a dart at a dart board in choosing<br>which<br>>>> tandem to connect to vs. going with the one that everyone<br>else in<br>>>> that town uses.<br>>>> <br>>>> So then I could port a number from any rate center in my<br>LATA (say<br>>>> Savanna) and point it to my LRN, living off of a tandem<br>switch that<br>>>> the Savanna ILEC isn't connected to (from my outside<br>world<br>>>> perspective)? Is there even the LATA constraint? Given the<br>porting<br>>>> limitations I had experienced in the VoIP world, I assumed<br>it was a<br>>>> tandem-by-tandem basis.<br>>>> <br>>>> So the LERG shows which tandem I need to send traffic to if<br>I want<br>>>> to talk to them, but they could send their outbound calls<br>to a<br>>>> different tandem? My current customer complaint is for<br>calls that<br>>>> we're sending to Comcast, apparently homed off of the<br>other tandem.<br>>>> <br>>>> If everyone is supposed to be on every tandem, then why<br>can't the<br>>>> tandem I'm on just accept the calls I'm sending to<br>Comcast, since<br>>>> Comcast should be there? Obviously me not being on the<br>other tandem<br>>>> would affect inbound traffic to me.<br>>>> <br>>>> Is there another service I should be paying Frontier for to<br>get me<br>>>> to the other tandem with some value-add service? I know<br>CenturyLink<br>>>> hops through almost every town going that way (former<br>LightCore and<br>>>> others before route). Frontier or CenturyLink may be able<br>to get me<br>>>> a DS1 to the other tandem if I need that.<br>>>> <br>>>> I'm aware that I could still be completely missing the<br>mark.<br>>>> <br>>>> BTW: Thanks for TelcoData. I subscribed a long time ago,<br>but<br>> haven't<br>>>> for many ages.<br>>>> <br>>>> -----<br>>>> Mike Hammett<br>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>>>> http://www.ics-il.com<br>>>> <br>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange<br>>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com<br>>>> <br>>>> -------------------------<br>>>> <br>>>> FROM: "Paul Timmins" <br>>>> TO: "Mike Hammett" <br>>>> CC: voiceops@voiceops.org<br>>>> SENT: Tuesday, August 28, 2018 5:19:11 PM<br>>>> SUBJECT: Re: [VoiceOps] LNP, tandems, etc.<br>>>> <br>>>> If that were true, you wouldn't be able to use<br>inteliquent (et al)<br>>>> as your access tandem. Everyone is supposed to be directly<br>or<br>>>> indirectly connected to every tandem in the LATA (which you<br>can't<br>>>> independently verify, as telcodata and the LERG both show<br>>>> terminating tandem information to reach that end office,<br>not what<br>>>> tandems the end office is hooked to to terminate calls.<br>>>> <br>>>> On Aug 28, 2018 17:47, Mike Hammett wrote:<br>>>> <br>>>> I thought you had to be on the same tandem to port a<br>number, but<br>>>> with what our tandem operator (Frontier) is telling me,<br>this isn't<br>>>> the case.<br>>>> <br>>>> Comcast ported a number from us in town A. The LRN they<br>pointed to<br>>>> is based in town B (per TelcoData). The tandem generally<br>used by<br>>>> carriers in both towns is based in town B. Naturally, we<br>send<br>>>> traffic to that tandem.<br>>>> <br>>>> The operator of that tandem is telling us that the LRN is<br>actually<br>>>> homed off of a different tandem in our LATA (operated by<br>>>> CenturyLink) in town C. Unfortunately, I can't<br>corroborate this<br>>>> information with TelcoData the only rate center I see off<br>of that<br>>>> tandem in TelcoData is an AT&T town next door.<br>>>> <br>>>> Where can I read up authoritatively on the porting<br>requirements<br>> that<br>>>> would apply to this and related bits of info I should know?<br>>>> <br>>>> I'm checking on our LERG access as I know that has the<br>> authoritative<br>>>> information, but I don't have that access at the<br>moment. Maybe<br>> we're<br>>>> not subscribed to it.<br>>>> <br>>>> Number NPA-NXX in town A:<br>>>> <br>>> <br>><br>https://www.telcodata.us/search-area-code-exchange-detail?npa=815&ex<br>change=991<br>> [1]<br>>>> <br>>>> LRN NPA-NXX in town B:<br>>>> <br>>> <br>><br>https://www.telcodata.us/search-area-code-exchange-detail?npa=815&ex<br>change=901<br>> [2]<br>>>> <br>>>> Tandem in town B:<br>>>> <br>>> <br>><br>https://www.telcodata.us/search-switches-by-tandem-clli?cllicode=DKLBILX<br>A50T<br>> [3]<br>>>> Tandem in town C:<br>>>> <br>>> <br>><br>https://www.telcodata.us/search-switches-by-tandem-clli?cllicode=DIXNILX<br>A50T<br>> [4]<br>>>> <br>>>> Thanks.<br>>>> <br>>>> -----<br>>>> Mike Hammett<br>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>>>> http://www.ics-il.com<br>>>> <br>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange<br>>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com<br>>>> <br>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>> VoiceOps mailing list<br>>>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org<br>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops<br>>> _______________________________________________<br>>> VoiceOps mailing list<br>>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org<br>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops<br>> _______________________________________________<br>> VoiceOps mailing list<br>> VoiceOps@voiceops.org<br>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops<br>> <br>> <br>> Links:<br>> ------<br>> [1]<br>><br>https://www.telcodata.us/search-area-code-exchange-detail?npa=815&ex<br>change=991<br>> [2]<br>><br>https://www.telcodata.us/search-area-code-exchange-detail?npa=815&ex<br>change=901<br>> [3] <br>><br>https://www.telcodata.us/search-switches-by-tandem-clli?cllicode=DKLBILX<br>A50T<br>> [4] <br>><br>https://www.telcodata.us/search-switches-by-tandem-clli?cllicode=DIXNILX<br>A50T<br>_______________________________________________<br>VoiceOps mailing list<br>VoiceOps@voiceops.org<br>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops<br></p></blockquote><br>_______________________________________________<br><br>VoiceOps mailing<br>list<br>VoiceOps@voiceops.org<br>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinf<br>o/voiceops<br></div><br></div></div></div></div><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></body></html><br></blockquote></body></html><br>_______________________________________________<br>VoiceOps mailing list<br>VoiceOps@voiceops.org<br>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops<br></div><br></div></body></html>