<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">I'm sure I know which one you're
talking about. It's because they exist in entirely different
regulatory domains. The upside of inbound feature group D is that
you get to cut out a terrible ILEC tandem, and at least the vendor
I'm thinking of doesn't charge for the trunks themselves, so
you're at a very strong cost advantage on it.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Inbound local trunking, usually
interconnection agreements dictate that the trunks have to be
dedicated per carrier, so you're just avoiding sinking hardware
cost and transport, but it still uses up considerable resources at
least in AT&T areas. So if you need 3 trunks to CHCGILWB's
tandem, they can't just route that to their trunks where they have
existing capacity, like FGD, but they have to install 3 shiny new
T1s just for your traffic, that they order as you, to their
equipment. It's stupid, convoluted, and wasteful but it's not the
vendor's fault, it's AT&T maintaining artificial barriers to
competition. As if they'd have it any other way.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">-Paul<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/9/19 3:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1921576727.4571.1565379754357.JavaMail.mhammett@ThunderFuck">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<style type="text/css">p { margin: 0; }</style>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:
10pt; color: #000000">I'm evaluating methods of extending our
footprint. I purposely left out company names.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>One of the companies we talked to was really only
interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not
the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly
different.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Given that I still need to build out to connect to the
local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to
connect to long distance?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different
because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem
could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other
switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections...
and they don't want to deal with that?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Are there third parties that don't have vastly different
terms for local tandem services?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's
going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I
understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.<br>
<div><br>
<div><span name="x"></span><br>
<br>
-----<br>
Mike Hammett<br>
Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.ics-il.com">http://www.ics-il.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Midwest Internet Exchange<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.midwest-ix.com">http://www.midwest-ix.com</a><br>
<br>
<span name="x"></span><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org">VoiceOps@voiceops.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>