Number Portability

Number Portability
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·

Links: Reply New Topic
Forums » Voice Over IP - VOIP » VOIP Tech Chat » Number Portability
page: 1 · 2
Tom @ 6th Nov 01:55PM:
Number Portability

This isn't VoIP-related, but I figure this is the best place to ask the question:

I got an email today from AT&T, who we're trying to port numbers to, stating:

"X O Communications own those numbers and ATT cannot take the numbers from them. This was all part of the deregulation of the phone companies. (FCC Regulations). I can bring in new phone numbers and have the other carrier remote call forward those numbers to the new lines I set up. I do not know what they charge for doing this (ATT $8 plus usage) but it is a computer that flips the call to the new numbers in tenths of a second."

I was under the impression LNP allowed any phone number to be taken anywhere -- that no matter who "owns" (is assigned) the block, it shouldn't matter. Am I wrong?
--
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
reply

RockyBB @ 6th Nov 02:13PM:
Re: Number Portability

said by Tom :

Am I wrong?

You're not so much wrong as you are incomplete. LNP regulations require the losing carrier to release your phone number to the winning carrier assuming you've proven identity and that the phone number is in the same rate center. Reading your quote carefully, it does not say that XO refused the port ... it says that AT&T cannot take the numbers from XO. Likely your phone numbers are resident in a different area from wherever AT&T is trying to port into.

Are you familiar with the concept of "rate centers"?
reply

PX Eliezer @ 6th Nov 02:14PM:
Re: Number Portability

That's just bizarre.

Maybe a time warp was involved, and your message was answered by a customer service rep who was six years in the past.

You leave out an important detail:

Are you currently using those numbers?

With a VoIP provider or directly with a CLEC? Which one?

I guess with a CLEC being that you said VoIP was not involved.

There ARE exceptions to LNP, such as numbers provided to you from a paging company, or from a dedicated faxing services such as MyFax.

Otherwise---

Just bizarre.

Push ATT for more details on this.

(Truly, recently Voip.MS had to fire someone on their first day on the job. Maybe they got a job at ATT after that.)

And tell them you are filing an FCC LNP complaint too!
reply

PX Eliezer @ 6th Nov 02:16PM:
Re: Number Portability

Exactly, but why wouldn't ATT just SAY THAT instead of giving an answer that sounds like they were on pot.

That's pot, not POTS.
reply

trev @ 6th Nov 02:18PM:
Re: Number Portability

Has a big company such as ATT ever explained the situation properly? Usually their customer service dumbs things down and just says it can't be done rather than explaining what the problem is and what steps you can take to solve it, if any.
--
Wondering what I do? Find out at »www.digitalcon.ca
reply

RockyBB @ 6th Nov 02:24PM:
Re: Number Portability

said by PX Eliezer :

That's just bizarre.

he said it wasn't VOIP related. He said the numbers are on XO. XO doesn't have direct residential service. He has numbers, not number, so there are more than one. So he has a business service he's switching to AT&T, probably in context of a relocation across a rate center boundary. He did say "taken anywhere." Happens all the time. If I'm wrong, you don't have to send me a Tastykake Lemon Pie.
reply

Tom @ 6th Nov 02:52PM:
Re: Number Portability

Keeping the numbers in the same rate center, so that's not an issue. The numbers are still active, although it looks like because we scheduled cancellation (even though it hasn't taken place), it may be blocking the port on AT&T's end. However, the rep doesn't seem to get that you can port numbers from XO:

"Tom,

I am not sure what else I can tell you except that I am not able to process this order. The phone number is privately owned .
Laurie"
--
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
reply

Tom @ 6th Nov 03:07PM:
Re: Number Portability

Just to clarify, the NPA-NXX is: »www.telcodata.us/telcodata/telco···ange=576

We're trying to port to AT&T (the CLEC), who obviously has a presence in the rate center, so that's not the problem.
--
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
reply

PX Eliezer @ 6th Nov 03:08PM:
Re: Number Portability

Tom:

Laurie is incorrect.

Get someone else and/or get a supervisor.

Although I will say, you may have screwed yourself by putting in a cancellation order. This may be the issue.

Other folks please note: Do NOT NOT NOT cancel anything with your old company until AFTER the new company ports in your numbers.

-------------------------------------

Tom:

Why not let RockyBB who I believe handles multiple telecom services, take care of this for you and make a nice match. He is a good shadchan.

And why not look into VoIP while you're at it?

Why go with ATT especially considering that you have shown documentary proof that they are idiots.

In fact, perhaps the problem is that NOBODY ports INTO ATT these days---as our member N9MD has previously discussed!
reply

Tom @ 6th Nov 03:15PM:
Re: Number Portability

I knew not to cancel the services before porting the number, but with a disconnect date at least a month from now, I was under the impression that as long as the numbers were ported by then, I would be fine. We're up against an auto-renewal deadline that would extend our contract by 3 years, so we're trying not to cut it close.

In the meantime, I've asked them to remove the cancellation order, and hopefully the wonderfully dense Laurie will be able to run an LNP check and port the numbers when that gets taken out of the system.

As for VoIP, I did look into it extensively. We were actually planning on going with it for a time, but in the current downturn, an investment in a new digital PBX system is out of the question, so we're stuck with POTS for a while. We're only paying about $40/month more than we would with a pure VoIP solution, which isn't too bad, and is still a considerable savings over what we're paying XO now (60% less).
--
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
reply

RockyBB @ 6th Nov 03:17PM:
Re: Number Portability

said by Tom :

The phone number is privately owned .

irrespective that I was wrong before ... this might be a clue. was the name on the port request form identical to the name on the XO invoice? or could the original order for the phone number years ago have been in the boss' personal name, not in what is now the Listed name?
reply

Tom @ 6th Nov 03:21PM:
Re: Number Portability

Based on my email with her, she seems to think that because XO "owns" the number, AT&T can't port it -- nothing to do with who is on the account, she's talking in general (as she thinks she understands it).

(I'm not even sure she put in a port request, I'm pretty sure she just ran it though an LNP system AT&T has to see if it was eligible or not.)
--
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
reply

RockyBB @ 6th Nov 03:53PM:
Re: Number Portability

said by Tom :

We're up against an auto-renewal deadline that would extend our contract by 3 years, so we're trying not to cut it close.

You have to ask for it, but XO will extend your service arrangement for up to 90 days past the anniversary without triggering the auto renewal. You can request the cancellation at any time during that 90 day period, so you're not adding 90 days of commitment.

Of course, if you have the bandwidth, and really want to use VOIP services, there are hosted IP-PBX providers which give you the features without the capital expense. Many of them now will include the IP-phones in the monthly subscription, so you don't even have to spring for the desktop sets!
reply

PX Eliezer @ 6th Nov 04:28PM:
Re: Number Portability

Tom, you would do well to listen to RockyBB's advice.

But aside from that, PLEASE find someone else to deal with at AT&T.

I work in healthcare, and often when we talk to HMO's or healthplans, we encounter MORONS.

We have to HANG UP and try to get someone else.

Sometimes we have to go through THREE MORONS to get to the ONE competent person!

-------------------------------------------

THIS AT&T PERSON OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT GET IT!

Call ATT again after the weekend.

Maybe if you are lucky they will have fired her by then.

-------------------------------------------

And it's NOT a surprise because FEW if any people try to port INTO the AT&T services. Most are FLEEING!
reply

prestonlewis @ 6th Nov 04:56PM:
Re: Number Portability

I didn't think the telcodata page he posted was very helpful. It has one ovation switch and some AT&T switches. Assuming his number is in the Ovation switch, CHCGILWUDS0, I only see Verizon, Denali and Ovation.

It's a pretty new switch (2007) and AT&T doesn't seem to have any presence in it. Therefore, not portable, right?

Looks like he could port his number to Verizon Wireless
reply

PX Eliezer @ 6th Nov 05:54PM:
Re: Number Portability

said by prestonlewis :

I didn't think the telcodata page he posted was very helpful. It has one ovation switch and some AT&T switches.

No, you have to look at the whole rate center:

»www.telcodata.us/telcodata/ratec···state=IL

Plenty of companies.

Tom, by the way:

XO is a CLEC, of course.

But you also called ATT a CLEC.

It's their home territory (ATT being successor to Ameritech) so ATT is not a CLEC, but rather ATT is the ILEC. (You will note that the page lists then as the RBOC. By definition, an RBOC on its home turf is an ILEC).
reply

PX Eliezer @ 6th Nov 06:28PM:
Re: Number Portability

And finally, Tom, please point this out to the idiotic Laurie at AT&T:

»www.corp.att.com/lnp/csir_port_in.html

------------------------------------------------

What a shame that AT&T workers don't know their jobs.
reply

neftv @ 6th Nov 06:35PM:
Re: Number Portability

What is even more shameful you go to apply a job in a AT&T store and your told you have no experience. Yet they hire people that still don't know their product.
reply

Tom @ 9th Nov 05:30PM:
Re: Number Portability

said by RockyBB :

said by Tom :

We're up against an auto-renewal deadline that would extend our contract by 3 years, so we're trying not to cut it close.

The XO rep I talked to said retentions would be in touch to set up the 90-day renewal, but so far nothing.

I looked into the hosted solution, but even that would require buying new phones, which is the biggest expense (I could set up an Asterisk box myself, but it's useless without phones).
--
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
reply

RockyBB @ 9th Nov 05:35PM:
Re: Number Portability

said by Tom :

I looked into the hosted solution, but even that would require buying new phones, which is the biggest expense

said by RockyBB :

Many of them now will include the IP-phones in the monthly subscription, so you don't even have to spring for the desktop sets!

I flipped some things around for ya... ;) You can IM me if you want to discuss alternatives.
reply

Tom @ 9th Nov 06:08PM:
Re: Number Portability

Whoops, was reading while on the phone with AT&T! :o Problem is that most places want $20-$30/month/phone, whereas the amount of calling per phone probably averages out to less than $10 (a lot of phones), which is why we'd rather just buy the phones up front and pay F9/Callcentric a cent or two a minute.
--
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
reply

Tom @ 9th Nov 06:12PM:
Re: Number Portability

And the conversations continue!

"Tom,

I am unable to port that number. It is a privately held number.

Laurie"

(FYI, I've already set up the order with another agent who was more than happy to help me out).
--
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
reply

RockyBB @ 9th Nov 06:34PM:
Re: Number Portability

said by Tom :

Problem is that most places want $20-$30/month/phone,

not every place.
reply

PX Eliezer @ 9th Nov 07:33PM:
Re: Number Portability

said by Tom :

And the conversations continue!

"Tom,

I am unable to port that number. It is a privately held number.

Laurie"

(FYI, I've already set up the order with another agent who was more than happy to help me out).

From the beginning, it was apparent that Laurie was a putz.

Not only for being uninformed, but for being UNWILLING/UNABLE to recognize that she was uninformed.

This is like the worker at the Atlanta Olympic games a few years ago---and her supervisor---both of whom REFUSED to believe that New Mexico was a state of the United States.

Or the state trooper---who ironically WAS from New Mexico---who arrested a driver for having West Virginia license plates. The officer said everyone knows there is no such state as West Virginia.

For other readers who may want to port to ATT, but who are dealing with an uninformed ATT worker, we again post this link which may provide some good information:

»www.corp.att.com/lnp/csir_port_in.html

-------------------------------------------------

BTW, Tom, "You're Welcome". :huh:
reply

nunya @ 10th Nov 12:53AM:
Re: Number Portability

Actually, once a D order (disconnect) hits the system it jams everything up. Even if the DD is 12/31/2099, or in PK status. It causes a "valid reject" that the LSC is forced to honor.

But, that should have been explained to you by the rep so you could cancel the D order and try to start the process later.
reply