Date: 4 Sep 2000 06:15:09 -0400 Message-ID: <20000904101509.26255.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: owner-telecom-digest@telecom-digest.org (Telecom Digest) To: telecom-digest@telecom-digest.org Subject: Telecom Digest V2000 #43 Reply-To: editor@telecom-digest.org Sender: owner-telecom-digest@telecom-digest.org Errors-To: owner-telecom-digest@telecom-digest.org Precedence: bulk X-UIDL: b86c4fa86c175e73898a44622b3ccfbf Status: RO X-Status: Telecom Digest Monday, September 4 2000 Volume 2000 : Number 043 In this issue: Re: What does it take to be a CLEC? Re: re - billing/answer supervision... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 3 Sep 2000 07:05:42 -0400 From: Roy Smith Subject: Re: What does it take to be a CLEC? djb0x7736f467@scream.org wrote: > Thinking of my days with IDT (hey! ouch, stop, it was years ago!) > I think you'd need [...] someone to make deals with the dominant LEC Interesting you mention that. There was an engineering type and the president of the company who came on the sales call. We were down in the phone room in the basement talking about getting access to the house pairs (owned by NYTel, oh sorry, NYNEX, oh no wait a minute, Bell Atlantic, oh no, wait, Verizon, that's it) so they could put their own DSLAM in there. The engineering guy said there would be no technical problems, but wasn't sure it was legal. The president's response was, "Don't worry about that, Joe [or whatever his name was] will get you in here in a minute". I got the strong impression that Joe's job was not so much "someone to make deals with the dominant LEC", but a lawyer who spent his days sending out nastygrams so they could fight their way into premises and CO's. - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 4 Sep 2000 01:32:17 -0400 From: Alan Boritz Subject: Re: re - billing/answer supervision... Mark J Cuccia wrote: >danny burstein wrote: > >> Mark J Cuccia writes: > >>> BTW, GTE has SUPED on some NPA-change messages where the NPA has >>> changed in their terminating territory (AT&T, MCI, and Sprint play >>> their own NPA-change messages, but the LECs play their own in their >>> own LATA territory as well, and for the Qwests, Frontiers, etc. who >>> have a long-haul network but don't play their own NPA-change messages. > >>> And many LECs here and there have been KNOWN to SUPE on intercepts, >>> vacant code messages, re-orders, busies, etc. It isn't "rare", but it >>> isn't as widespread as I might be describing here... > >(Ameritech is also known to frequently "supe" on vacants, re-orders, >intercepts, etc) Bell Atlantic/Verizon does that intentionally when the intercept is within a centrex number block. They consider the call "completed," even though (NY) PSC-900 requires a PBX operator to NOT return supervision for the same intercepts. A colleague brought that to my attention once long ago with respect to our respective NYC government agencies, and the point was driven home when I lost a quarter calling an invalid number on our own switch. Note also that the tone and recording intercepts for which Bell Atlantic routinely returns answer supervision are NOT treated the same way if the number called was a regular (non-centrex) telephone number. >> Which brings up a question I'd love to know the answer to, namely: >> >> what types of "answers" are supposed to be "unsupervised"? >> >> Presumably there's some list somewhere which, while perhaps not >> perfect, should give some guidance. The "list" is usually contained within the state tariff for that particular LEC. An informal list can usually be found in PBX programming manuals. Lucent, Siemens, NEC, and other switch manufacturers are very specific on the types of tone and recorded intercepts that are not intended to return answer supervision. Keep in mind that those features would not be present on most state-of-the-art PBX's if there wasn't a legitimate need. - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ End of Telecom Digest V2000 #43 *******************************