I agree with this explanation more than the others, as
I work with Manila resources whose calls routinely
come in on caller ID as 632-9XX-XXXX (made to fit the
format and look like a 10-digit US number).

Neil
--- Stanley Cline <sc1@...> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:21:27 -0000, garko@...
> <garko@...> wrote:
>
> > I have several odd questions.  My wife just
> received a call for me
> > from 632-911-8866, which came up as "unavailable"
> on the caller id.
> > They didn't give her a name; said they would just
> call back later.
> >
> > Here are my questions:
> >
> > 1.  Since I have privacy manager, how did an
> "unavailable" call come
> > through to the house?
>
> Since there was a number for caller ID to show it
> got through; the
> privacy manager will only kick in if there's no
> caller ID number at
> all, or the caller has blocked display of their
> number.
>
> > 2.  What kind of number is 632-911-8866?  Never
> heard of 632 before.
> > 3.  What kind of exchange is 911?
>
> Area code 632 doesn't exist, and 911 isn't a valid
> prefix.  It sounds
> like the call actually came from +63 2 9118866 --
> i.e., Manila,
> Phillipines, where there are a number of offshore
> telemarketing and
> call centers -- and the international caller ID got
> twisted into North
> American format, which is rare but does happen.
>
> -SC
> --
> Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org --
> http://www.roamer1.org/
> ...
> "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today.
>  There might
> be a law against it by that time."
> -/usr/games/fortune
>




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, Dennis McLeod
<dmcleod@o...> wrote:
>
> One thing that can cause this is a VOIP line that has no "actual"
phone number assigned to it for any incoming calls from the regular
DDD network.
>
> In this case the VOIP supplier can get around having to lease an
actual telephone number from the RBOC to supply you with outgoing
Dial tone service. But to increase profits to the VOIP supplier he
can provide a restricted access incoming service where by he can
assign any number he wishes(since the number is specific to his
private network only to facilitate the incoming call.
>
> For instance in my own case I have gone to a VOIP supplier for a
VOIP line for specifically making outbound calls to any exchange that
can be reached for free from any of the VOIP suppliers access points.
My number is 705-950-6003 (A virtual Phone Number)(It can be any
number I choose as long as it isn't assigned anywhere else on the
VOIP system I am on, it can be working anywhere else on the DDD
network) and it shows up as CLID at the receiving party. Looks like a
real number but it isn't. If you dial the number directly by DDD you
will go nowhere near me. Because I wanted a cheap incoming service
for some testing purposes, I pay a small premium to obtain reverse
calling. To obtain incoming calls, one has to call a 10 digit access
number in any given community center, receive DT and then you can
dial the VOIP number which was displayed on the incoming call. If I
had chosen to have a real number I could receive calls directly from
the DDD Network without the use of the access numb
> er.
>
> The advantage is I get free unlimited calling, both in and oubound,
throughout the VOIP's serving area for a  lot less than I can get
from my regional carrier Bell Canada and with many addition features
included.
>
> The number you are getting sure fits this scenario for a VOIP
operated Call Center that has access to free calling in your area,
wants to look like a legitimate caller on CLID but doesn't want you
to be able to call back to them. They also have there name blocked in
your case.
>
>  From the example that I have going you can start to see what would
have happened if I had chosen a virtual number that was the same as
some ones working DDD network number just to confuse the call
receiver.
>
> This is just one of the many things that VOIP service will have to
solve in its evolution.
>
> Dennis McLeod

If you called 911 from your VOIP number - -how does 911 find your
location???

I realize the cited example below is Canada, but I wonder how much of
this is being done in the US.  Wouldn't this be a illegal
circumvention of access charges based on the recent FCC ruling on
AT&T's VOIP traffic?  It appears to me that they would be trying to
classify an interLATA call as a local call by doing this.  SBC is
suing AT&T for this reason.
(http://www.x-changemag.com/articles/461front4.html)

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, Dennis McLeod
<dmcleod@o...> wrote:
> On 2004/06/30 14:21, you wrote:
> >I have several odd questions.  My wife just received a call for me
> >from 632-911-8866, which came up as "unavailable" on the caller id.
> >They didn't give her a name; said they would just call back later.
> >
> >Here are my questions:
> >
> >1.  Since I have privacy manager, how did an "unavailable" call come
> >through to the house?
> >2.  What kind of number is 632-911-8866?  Never heard of 632 before.
> >3.  What kind of exchange is 911?
> >
> >Strange, isn't it?  Any thoughts or clues to this mystery would help
> >greatly.
> >
> >Thanks!
> >John
> >Columbus, OH (614)
> End of Quoted Message - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> One thing that can cause this is a VOIP line that has no "actual"
phone number assigned to it for any incoming calls from the regular
DDD network.
>
> In this case the VOIP supplier can get around having to lease an
actual telephone number from the RBOC to supply you with outgoing Dial
tone service. But to increase profits to the VOIP supplier he can
provide a restricted access incoming service where by he can assign
any number he wishes(since the number is specific to his private
network only to facilitate the incoming call.
>
> For instance in my own case I have gone to a VOIP supplier for a
VOIP line for specifically making outbound calls to any exchange that
can be reached for free from any of the VOIP suppliers access points.
My number is 705-950-6003 (A virtual Phone Number)(It can be any
number I choose as long as it isn't assigned anywhere else on the VOIP
system I am on, it can be working anywhere else on the DDD network)
and it shows up as CLID at the receiving party. Looks like a real
number but it isn't. If you dial the number directly by DDD you will
go nowhere near me. Because I wanted a cheap incoming service for some
testing purposes, I pay a small premium to obtain reverse calling. To
obtain incoming calls, one has to call a 10 digit access number in any
given community center, receive DT and then you can dial the VOIP
number which was displayed on the incoming call. If I had chosen to
have a real number I could receive calls directly from the DDD Network
without the use of the access numb
> er.
>
> The advantage is I get free unlimited calling, both in and oubound,
throughout the VOIP's serving area for a  lot less than I can get from
my regional carrier Bell Canada and with many addition features included.
>
> The number you are getting sure fits this scenario for a VOIP
operated Call Center that has access to free calling in your area,
wants to look like a legitimate caller on CLID but doesn't want you to
be able to call back to them. They also have there name blocked in
your case.
>
>  From the example that I have going you can start to see what would
have happened if I had chosen a virtual number that was the same as
some ones working DDD network number just to confuse the call receiver.
>
> This is just one of the many things that VOIP service will have to
solve in its evolution.
>
> Dennis McLeod

This seems to be the current method of operation by most VoIP service providers
(not including mine).  These providers are not LECs and usually have no PSTN
switching facilities.  They lease switching from other CLECs and use the CLEC's
Local Interconnection (LIS) facilities to terminate calls to LECs rather than
deliver them to the IXC where the terminating LEC would receive it's due access
rate.  This is used to create extended local calling areas to make the product
more attractive as a toll-bypass product, relying on the circumvention of the
current access arrangement to offer very low-cost service.

These carriers also are not 911 compliant in most cases (also not including
mine).  Typically, the 911 call is simply forwarded to the 911 PSAP's Directory
Number.  This line does not terminate to the operator stations as a normal 911
call, and is answered with the lowest priority.

Regulation has not yet caught up to these issues, but will soon I presume.  In
addition, LECs are taking new steps to audit the traffic present on their LIS
trunking facilities to look for this very thing.



   ----- Original Message -----
   From: joiseyjoe
   To: local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 8:08 AM
   Subject: [local-calling-guide] Re: 632?


   I realize the cited example below is Canada, but I wonder how much of
   this is being done in the US.  Wouldn't this be a illegal
   circumvention of access charges based on the recent FCC ruling on
   AT&T's VOIP traffic?  It appears to me that they would be trying to
   classify an interLATA call as a local call by doing this.  SBC is
   suing AT&T for this reason.
   (http://www.x-changemag.com/articles/461front4.html)

   --- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, Dennis McLeod
   <dmcleod@o...> wrote:
   > On 2004/06/30 14:21, you wrote:
   > >I have several odd questions.  My wife just received a call for me
   > >from 632-911-8866, which came up as "unavailable" on the caller id.
   > >They didn't give her a name; said they would just call back later.
   > >
   > >Here are my questions:
   > >
   > >1.  Since I have privacy manager, how did an "unavailable" call come
   > >through to the house?
   > >2.  What kind of number is 632-911-8866?  Never heard of 632 before.
   > >3.  What kind of exchange is 911?
   > >
   > >Strange, isn't it?  Any thoughts or clues to this mystery would help
   > >greatly.
   > >
   > >Thanks!
   > >John
   > >Columbus, OH (614)
   > End of Quoted Message - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
   >
   > One thing that can cause this is a VOIP line that has no "actual"
   phone number assigned to it for any incoming calls from the regular
   DDD network.
   >
   > In this case the VOIP supplier can get around having to lease an
   actual telephone number from the RBOC to supply you with outgoing Dial
   tone service. But to increase profits to the VOIP supplier he can
   provide a restricted access incoming service where by he can assign
   any number he wishes(since the number is specific to his private
   network only to facilitate the incoming call.
   >
   > For instance in my own case I have gone to a VOIP supplier for a
   VOIP line for specifically making outbound calls to any exchange that
   can be reached for free from any of the VOIP suppliers access points.
   My number is 705-950-6003 (A virtual Phone Number)(It can be any
   number I choose as long as it isn't assigned anywhere else on the VOIP
   system I am on, it can be working anywhere else on the DDD network)
   and it shows up as CLID at the receiving party. Looks like a real
   number but it isn't. If you dial the number directly by DDD you will
   go nowhere near me. Because I wanted a cheap incoming service for some
   testing purposes, I pay a small premium to obtain reverse calling. To
   obtain incoming calls, one has to call a 10 digit access number in any
   given community center, receive DT and then you can dial the VOIP
   number which was displayed on the incoming call. If I had chosen to
   have a real number I could receive calls directly from the DDD Network
   without the use of the access numb
   > er.
   >
   > The advantage is I get free unlimited calling, both in and oubound,
   throughout the VOIP's serving area for a  lot less than I can get from
   my regional carrier Bell Canada and with many addition features included.
   >
   > The number you are getting sure fits this scenario for a VOIP
   operated Call Center that has access to free calling in your area,
   wants to look like a legitimate caller on CLID but doesn't want you to
   be able to call back to them. They also have there name blocked in
   your case.
   >
   >  From the example that I have going you can start to see what would
   have happened if I had chosen a virtual number that was the same as
   some ones working DDD network number just to confuse the call receiver.
   >
   > This is just one of the many things that VOIP service will have to
   solve in its evolution.
   >
   > Dennis McLeod


         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
               ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Yahoo! Groups Links

     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/

     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     local-calling-guide-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

It doesnt, unless you can tell them.
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: cgordon55
   To: local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 8:07 AM
   Subject: [local-calling-guide] Re: 632?


   --- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, Dennis McLeod
   <dmcleod@o...> wrote:
   >
   > One thing that can cause this is a VOIP line that has no "actual"
   phone number assigned to it for any incoming calls from the regular
   DDD network.
   >
   > In this case the VOIP supplier can get around having to lease an
   actual telephone number from the RBOC to supply you with outgoing
   Dial tone service. But to increase profits to the VOIP supplier he
   can provide a restricted access incoming service where by he can
   assign any number he wishes(since the number is specific to his
   private network only to facilitate the incoming call.
   >
   > For instance in my own case I have gone to a VOIP supplier for a
   VOIP line for specifically making outbound calls to any exchange that
   can be reached for free from any of the VOIP suppliers access points.
   My number is 705-950-6003 (A virtual Phone Number)(It can be any
   number I choose as long as it isn't assigned anywhere else on the
   VOIP system I am on, it can be working anywhere else on the DDD
   network) and it shows up as CLID at the receiving party. Looks like a
   real number but it isn't. If you dial the number directly by DDD you
   will go nowhere near me. Because I wanted a cheap incoming service
   for some testing purposes, I pay a small premium to obtain reverse
   calling. To obtain incoming calls, one has to call a 10 digit access
   number in any given community center, receive DT and then you can
   dial the VOIP number which was displayed on the incoming call. If I
   had chosen to have a real number I could receive calls directly from
   the DDD Network without the use of the access numb
   > er.
   >
   > The advantage is I get free unlimited calling, both in and oubound,
   throughout the VOIP's serving area for a  lot less than I can get
   from my regional carrier Bell Canada and with many addition features
   included.
   >
   > The number you are getting sure fits this scenario for a VOIP
   operated Call Center that has access to free calling in your area,
   wants to look like a legitimate caller on CLID but doesn't want you
   to be able to call back to them. They also have there name blocked in
   your case.
   >
   >  From the example that I have going you can start to see what would
   have happened if I had chosen a virtual number that was the same as
   some ones working DDD network number just to confuse the call
   receiver.
   >
   > This is just one of the many things that VOIP service will have to
   solve in its evolution.
   >
   > Dennis McLeod

   If you called 911 from your VOIP number - -how does 911 find your
   location???



         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
               ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Yahoo! Groups Links

     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/

     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     local-calling-guide-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At 01:08 PM 7/1/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>I realize the cited example below is Canada, but I wonder how much of
>this is being done in the US.  Wouldn't this be a illegal
>circumvention of access charges based on the recent FCC ruling on
>AT&T's VOIP traffic?  It appears to me that they would be trying to
>classify an interLATA call as a local call by doing this.  SBC is
>suing AT&T for this reason.
>(http://www.x-changemag.com/articles/461front4.html)

In the situation covered by that lawsuit, calls originated on the PSTN and
terminated on the PSTN.  In this case, calls originate on the PSTN but are
converted to VoIP (data) and stay as VoIP - the call is not normally* terminated
back on the PSTN.  You may recall that when people first started using local
access numbers to connect to services such as Compuserve, the Bells wanted those
calls classified as toll also, but the government essentially took the position
that once the call was converted to data it was out of their hands.

In the present, and probably for the foreseeable future, pure VoIP calls are
considered data, and not subject to access charges of any kind (Google the
"Pulver decision" for more information). Therefore, logic would say that when a
call is handed off to VoIP, and not converted back to a PSTN call at some point,
it's no different than one of those old local access numbers for Compuserve, or
a present-day local access number for AOL or Earthlink.

* Granted that occasionally such calls will splash back to the PSTN due to
action by the customer, for example setting call-forwarding to go to a PSTN
number.  But that would be a customer-initiated action, and not the primary
purpose of such numbers.  However, this helps illustrate how crazy the whole
access charge regime is.  The sooner they do away with the whole thing and go to
a "bill and keep" system, the better.  If it weren't for the reluctance of the
rural carriers, who use such access charges as a form of "corporate welfare",
we'd be well on our way to seeing that archaic system eliminated.

_____
Interested in VoIP news? Subscribe to the VoIP News list:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/voipnews/
How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html
If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/
Resources for Michigan Telephone Users web site:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/

On 2004/07/01 09:07, you wrote:
>If you called 911 from your VOIP number - -how does 911 find your
>location???
End of Quoted Message - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
No 911 service provided.

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, Dennis McLeod
<dmcleod@o...> wrote:
> On 2004/06/30 20:22, you wrote:
> >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> >Can you share the name of the VoIP Service provider
> >referenced in your e-mail?  Just curious.  I currently
> >work in the VoIP space (supporting both SIP & packetcable).
> >
> >=====
> >
> >JOSEPH G. FARRUGIA
>
>
> Here you go.
>
> http://www.talknet.ca/resiline.asp
>
> Dennis

At Joe's request I've removed the original reply, which contained his
signature and email address, but I've left the URL in case anyone
wants it.

It depends on the VoIP provider. Some smaller VoIP providers only
provide IP<->IP connectivity, which is obviously the cheapest and
easiest (not to mention law free) solution, but the bigger VoIP
providers do provide PSTN origination and termination. It depends on how
the VoIP provider went about to providing this PSTN connectivity, some
use their own AS5300's with PRI's attached and some use third party
vendors. Not all of these VoIP providers who talk to the PSTN do 911 in
any way shape or form, and for the moment can get away with that due to
the lack of regulatory rules and clarification on the subject, but I
think we all know that this will change eventually. Other VoIP providers
do 10 digit PSAP dialing, and they hit the administrative line at the
PSAP, and as someone previously stated, gets the lowest priority. Those
VoIP providers who use their own AS5300's probably don't have the
resources to do e911 trunking, as they're technically not a xLEC. But
those the third party providers who some VoIP providers use to terminate
their traffic might have the resources to do e911 trunking, so 911 calls
might actually hit the PSAP as if you had done it from your land line,
although the rules for this vary depending on how brave the third party
provider is, but I do know some providers do do this.

Mike Chase wrote:

>This seems to be the current method of operation by most VoIP service providers
(not including mine).  These providers are not LECs and usually have no PSTN
switching facilities.  They lease switching from other CLECs and use the CLEC's
Local Interconnection (LIS) facilities to terminate calls to LECs rather than
deliver them to the IXC where the terminating LEC would receive it's due access
rate.  This is used to create extended local calling areas to make the product
more attractive as a toll-bypass product, relying on the circumvention of the
current access arrangement to offer very low-cost service.
>
>These carriers also are not 911 compliant in most cases (also not including
mine).  Typically, the 911 call is simply forwarded to the 911 PSAP's Directory
Number.  This line does not terminate to the operator stations as a normal 911
call, and is answered with the lowest priority.
>
>Regulation has not yet caught up to these issues, but will soon I presume.  In
addition, LECs are taking new steps to audit the traffic present on their LIS
trunking facilities to look for this very thing.
>
>
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: joiseyjoe
>  To: local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com
>  Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 8:08 AM
>  Subject: [local-calling-guide] Re: 632?
>
>
>  I realize the cited example below is Canada, but I wonder how much of
>  this is being done in the US.  Wouldn't this be a illegal
>  circumvention of access charges based on the recent FCC ruling on
>  AT&T's VOIP traffic?  It appears to me that they would be trying to
>  classify an interLATA call as a local call by doing this.  SBC is
>  suing AT&T for this reason.
>  (http://www.x-changemag.com/articles/461front4.html)
>
>  --- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, Dennis McLeod
>  <dmcleod@o...> wrote:
>  > On 2004/06/30 14:21, you wrote:
>  > >I have several odd questions.  My wife just received a call for me
>  > >from 632-911-8866, which came up as "unavailable" on the caller id.
>  > >They didn't give her a name; said they would just call back later.
>  > >
>  > >Here are my questions:
>  > >
>  > >1.  Since I have privacy manager, how did an "unavailable" call come
>  > >through to the house?
>  > >2.  What kind of number is 632-911-8866?  Never heard of 632 before.
>  > >3.  What kind of exchange is 911?
>  > >
>  > >Strange, isn't it?  Any thoughts or clues to this mystery would help
>  > >greatly.
>  > >
>  > >Thanks!
>  > >John
>  > >Columbus, OH (614)
>  > End of Quoted Message - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>  >
>  > One thing that can cause this is a VOIP line that has no "actual"
>  phone number assigned to it for any incoming calls from the regular
>  DDD network.
>  >
>  > In this case the VOIP supplier can get around having to lease an
>  actual telephone number from the RBOC to supply you with outgoing Dial
>  tone service. But to increase profits to the VOIP supplier he can
>  provide a restricted access incoming service where by he can assign
>  any number he wishes(since the number is specific to his private
>  network only to facilitate the incoming call.
>  >
>  > For instance in my own case I have gone to a VOIP supplier for a
>  VOIP line for specifically making outbound calls to any exchange that
>  can be reached for free from any of the VOIP suppliers access points.
>  My number is 705-950-6003 (A virtual Phone Number)(It can be any
>  number I choose as long as it isn't assigned anywhere else on the VOIP
>  system I am on, it can be working anywhere else on the DDD network)
>  and it shows up as CLID at the receiving party. Looks like a real
>  number but it isn't. If you dial the number directly by DDD you will
>  go nowhere near me. Because I wanted a cheap incoming service for some
>  testing purposes, I pay a small premium to obtain reverse calling. To
>  obtain incoming calls, one has to call a 10 digit access number in any
>  given community center, receive DT and then you can dial the VOIP
>  number which was displayed on the incoming call. If I had chosen to
>  have a real number I could receive calls directly from the DDD Network
>  without the use of the access numb
>  > er.
>  >
>  > The advantage is I get free unlimited calling, both in and oubound,
>  throughout the VOIP's serving area for a  lot less than I can get from
>  my regional carrier Bell Canada and with many addition features included.
>  >
>  > The number you are getting sure fits this scenario for a VOIP
>  operated Call Center that has access to free calling in your area,
>  wants to look like a legitimate caller on CLID but doesn't want you to
>  be able to call back to them. They also have there name blocked in
>  your case.
>  >
>  >  From the example that I have going you can start to see what would
>  have happened if I had chosen a virtual number that was the same as
>  some ones working DDD network number just to confuse the call receiver.
>  >
>  > This is just one of the many things that VOIP service will have to
>  solve in its evolution.
>  >
>  > Dennis McLeod
>
>
>        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>              ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/
>
>    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>    local-calling-guide-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, garko@y... wrote:
[...]
> I have several odd questions.  My wife just received a call for me
> from 632-911-8866, which came up as "unavailable" on the caller
id.

In the past few days, Slashdot.com highlighted an article at
SecurityFocus.com discussing how VoIP providers may be opening up
security holes with Callerid - as their gateways allow spoofing of
callerid information, and allow the recipient to see the caller's
phone number - even if the call is set to block callerid information.

http://securityfocus.com/news/9061

Note that CallerID and ANI (incoming number identification on toll-
free lines) are different things...   Other people have pointed out
that ISDN lines and PBXs also have the ability to supply invalid
callerID information.

This may add fuel to the regulatory fire currently going on over how
much and to what degree VoIP needs to be regulated...   Anyone
relying solely on callerid data to authenticate incoming callers is
asking for trouble.
--
Fred Stiening
fred300@...

For that matter, anyone relying on the telco industry to come up with sane ways
to do things needs to be drug out in the street and flogged with some generally
annoying, but harmless object.

Art Stone <artstone@...> wrote:--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com,
garko@y... wrote:
[...]
> I have several odd questions. My wife just received a call for me
> from 632-911-8866, which came up as "unavailable" on the caller
id.

In the past few days, Slashdot.com highlighted an article at
SecurityFocus.com discussing how VoIP providers may be opening up
security holes with Callerid - as their gateways allow spoofing of
callerid information, and allow the recipient to see the caller's
phone number - even if the call is set to block callerid information.

http://securityfocus.com/news/9061

Note that CallerID and ANI (incoming number identification on toll-
free lines) are different things... Other people have pointed out
that ISDN lines and PBXs also have the ability to supply invalid
callerID information.

This may add fuel to the regulatory fire currently going on over how
much and to what degree VoIP needs to be regulated... Anyone
relying solely on callerid data to authenticate incoming callers is
asking for trouble.
--
Fred Stiening
fred300@...






Yahoo! Groups Links








---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Kudos to Ray for an amazing job with the 'Local Calling Guide'.   Wow!

I must have skipped geography classes - cause I can't figure out how I can
use the V and H coordinates.  I have Microsoft MapPoint, and was trying to
enter the coordinates - can the V/H be mapped as Latitude/Longitude?


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Look here:

http://www.voip-info.org/wiki-V+and+H+Coordinates


Jim

James H. Thompson
jht@...

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Mike Derouin
   To: local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 8:31 AM
   Subject: [local-calling-guide] The V and H coordinates on the 'Local Calling
Guide'


   Kudos to Ray for an amazing job with the 'Local Calling Guide'.   Wow!

   I must have skipped geography classes - cause I can't figure out how I can
   use the V and H coordinates.  I have Microsoft MapPoint, and was trying to
   enter the coordinates - can the V/H be mapped as Latitude/Longitude?


   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
               ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Yahoo! Groups Links

     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/

     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     local-calling-guide-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Derouin"
<mderouin@m...> wrote:
> Kudos to Ray for an amazing job with the 'Local Calling Guide'.   Wow!
>
> I must have skipped geography classes - cause I can't figure out how
I can
> use the V and H coordinates.  I have Microsoft MapPoint, and was
trying to
> enter the coordinates - can the V/H be mapped as Latitude/Longitude?
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

See also
http://members.dandy.net/~czg/vh2ll.c
for a V/H to lat/long conversion program in C that I found in Telecom
Digest several years ago, but be careful when using the command line
to enter V/H coordinates, since it will give incorrect results for
negative numbers (which is a concern mostly for southern points like
Puerto Rico).

When I wrote a perl module to do the conversion, I found that I had to study all
of the various examples I could find on the net (c, fortran, and java) to come
up with something that would work over the complete V and H range.
I just added the URL below to the the V and H page at www.voip-info.org


See also
http://members.dandy.net/~czg/vh2ll.c
for a V/H to lat/long conversion program in C that I found in Telecom
Digest several years ago, but be careful when using the command line
to enter V/H coordinates, since it will give incorrect results for
negative numbers (which is a concern mostly for southern points like
Puerto Rico).



       Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
             ADVERTISEMENT







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

Yahoo! Groups Links

     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/

     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     local-calling-guide-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Sat, 17 Jul 2004, czg7777 wrote:

> See also
> http://members.dandy.net/~czg/vh2ll.c
> for a V/H to lat/long conversion program in C that I found in Telecom
> Digest several years ago, but be careful when using the command line
> to enter V/H coordinates, since it will give incorrect results for
> negative numbers (which is a concern mostly for southern points like
> Puerto Rico).


Actually, you mean the most "eastern" points when referring to
"negative" value V&H co-ordinates for PR/USVI.

American Samoa is about to soon join the NANP, and it will have positive
values in both the V&H parts, and it is actually SOUTH of the equator.

And while Mexico is not part of the NANP, AT&T did extrapolate and
assign V&H co-ordinates to Mexico many years ago, for distance-based
billing/rating. Mexico is strictly "positive" for its V&H co-ordinate
values.

The "0-0 starting point" of the V&H grid is actually somewhere in
northeastern Canada, I think near Greenland.

Telcordia-TRA has some generic V&H maps of the US/Canada:
http://www.trainfo.com/products_services/tra/vhpage.html

and a self-extracting .exe file for downloadable generic US/Canada VH maps
http://www.trainfo.com/products_services/tra/downloads/vhmaps.exe


Mark J. Cuccia
mcuccia (at) tulane (dot) edu
New Orleans LA CSA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, Mark J Cuccia
<mcuccia@t...> wrote:
> Actually, you mean the most "eastern" points when referring to
> "negative" value V&H co-ordinates for PR/USVI.

Right you are. Oops.

> The "0-0 starting point" of the V&H grid is actually somewhere in
> northeastern Canada, I think near Greenland.

Yes, there are several points in northern Nunavut where the V
co-ordinate is 1. Grise Fiord/Ausuittuq NU (V=1 H=6929) is the most
northerly community (and telephone exchange) in Canada.

INDOTEL, the telecom regulator in the Dominican Republic, has
announced a plan to reorganize local calling along provincial lines
effective 1 April 2006. See the press release (in Spanish only):

http://tinyurl.com/6alqh

Does anyone know how the current exchanges (39 at last count)
correspond with the 30 provinces?

Thanks

I can't help you with your question. I imagine you can figure it out with a
map.

Previously the definition of a local calling area in the D.R. was based on
the coordinates of the origin and destination. If the coordinates of the
origin and destination were the same, it was local otherwise it was long
distance. The press release says that instead that calls within a province
are local.

Regards,

Carl Wright
Service Level Corporation
734 827-2000

-----Original Message-----
From: czg7777 [mailto:czg7777@...]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 10:27 PM
To: local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [local-calling-guide] Dominican Republic reorganizes calling areas


INDOTEL, the telecom regulator in the Dominican Republic, has
announced a plan to reorganize local calling along provincial lines
effective 1 April 2006. See the press release (in Spanish only):

http://tinyurl.com/6alqh <http://tinyurl.com/6alqh>

Does anyone know how the current exchanges (39 at last count)
correspond with the 30 provinces?

Thanks



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129ce5ql6/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705004726:HM/EXP=1090981599/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http://comp
anion.yahoo.com> click here

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2128215/rand=776401753>


   _____

Yahoo! Groups Links


* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/>


* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
local-calling-guide-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:local-calling-guide-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>



* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,
I am looking for the latest NPA-NXX database in an excel format or
a .csv file will do. I have found sites where you can search, but I
am interested to have it all in a single file which I can download on
my PC.
Any help will be appreciated.
Thanks

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, "Nikhil Gupta" <guptanikhil@y...>
wrote:
> Hi,
> I am looking for the latest NPA-NXX database in an excel format or
> a .csv file will do. I have found sites where you can search, but I
> am interested to have it all in a single file which I can download on
> my PC.

NPA-NXX information for the US is available from
http://www.nanpa.com/reports/reports_cocodes.html
in delimited text or Excel formats.

On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, czg7777 wrote:

> "Nikhil Gupta" <guptanikhil@...> wrote:

>> I am looking for the latest NPA-NXX database in an excel format or
>> a .csv file will do. I have found sites where you can search, but I
>> am interested to have it all in a single file which I can download
>> on my PC.

> NPA-NXX information for the US is available from
> http://www.nanpa.com/reports/reports_cocodes.html
> in delimited text or Excel formats.

But first PK .zip'd!

mjc

Didn't get you PK Zip?
presently i have to go to each of the state and then
the NPA and then it lists a file (which i can convert
in excel). Isn't there a place, where i can download a
single excel file in one shot...???

--- Mark J Cuccia <mcuccia@...> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, czg7777 wrote:
>
> > "Nikhil Gupta" <guptanikhil@...> wrote:
>
> >> I am looking for the latest NPA-NXX database in
> an excel format or
> >> a .csv file will do. I have found sites where you
> can search, but I
> >> am interested to have it all in a single file
> which I can download
> >> on my PC.
>
> > NPA-NXX information for the US is available from
> > http://www.nanpa.com/reports/reports_cocodes.html
> > in delimited text or Excel formats.
>
> But first PK .zip'd!
>
> mjc
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion
> Toolbar.
> Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/26EolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/
>
>     local-calling-guide-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>


=====
Nikhil Gupta
e-mail : nikhilgupta@...,guptanikhil@...



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, nikhil gupta <guptanikhil@y...>
wrote:
> Didn't get you PK Zip?
> presently i have to go to each of the state and then
> the NPA and then it lists a file (which i can convert
> in excel). Isn't there a place, where i can download a
> single excel file in one shot...???
>
Use the "central office codes assignment records" link, or go directly to
http://www.nanpa.com/reports/reports_cocodes_assign.html

There you will find zipped text or Excel files by region. You will not find a
single Excel file containing prefixes for all regions, because
Excel can't handle that many records. If you want a single file, grab the
regional files and build your own database.

Thanks for the info.
Will gather all of them..
--- czg7777 <czg7777@...> wrote:
> --- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, nikhil
> gupta <guptanikhil@y...> wrote:
> > Didn't get you PK Zip?
> > presently i have to go to each of the state and
> then
> > the NPA and then it lists a file (which i can
> convert
> > in excel). Isn't there a place, where i can
> download a
> > single excel file in one shot...???
> >
> Use the "central office codes assignment records"
> link, or go directly to
>
http://www.nanpa.com/reports/reports_cocodes_assign.html
>
> There you will find zipped text or Excel files by
> region. You will not find a single Excel file
> containing prefixes for all regions, because
> Excel can't handle that many records. If you want a
> single file, grab the regional files and build your
> own database.
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion
> Toolbar.
> Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/26EolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/
>
>     local-calling-guide-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>


=====
Nikhil Gupta
e-mail : nikhilgupta@...,guptanikhil@...



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, Carl Wright <wright@s...> wrote:
> I can't help you with your question. I imagine you can figure it out with a
> map.
>
http://www.statoids.com/ydo.html has a list of municipalities in the DR. There
is also a link to a list of provinces;
due to recent splits there are now 31 provinces and 1 district.

NANPA Planning Letter #338, dated Monday 2-August-2004
http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/PL338_DR808_829_overlay_080204.pdf
NPA 829 to Overlay NPA 809 (Dominican Republic)

Quoting from the NANPA Planning Letter:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"(on) July 14, 2004, Indotel notified NANPA that it had approved an
all-services distributed overlay as the relief method for the 809 NPA.
The 809 NPA currently serves the Caribbean country of Dominican
Republic.

"The new 829 NPA will serve the same geographic area currently served
by the existing 809 NPA."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Indotel (http://www.indotel.org.do) is the Dominican Republic's
regulator/numbering/etc. organization, but I couldn't find anything on
the 829 overlay to 809 at their predominantly Spanish-language website.
Of course, the May 2004 dated list of 809-NXX assignments, broken down
by service-providers, is a pdf file at:
http://www.indotel.org.do/Site/Codigos_de_oficinas_centrales_NXX.pdf

Permissive ten-digit local same-NPA (intra-809) dialing to begin on
31-January-2005 (although I wouldn't be surprised if some switch
translations already allow permissive ten-digit local intra-809 dialing.

Mandatory ten-digit local intra-809 dialing to begin on 1-August-2005.

The earliest effective/activation date of geographic/POTS (non-test)
new 829-NXX c.o.codes is to be 1-October-2005.


Toll calls (including intra-809) are already dialed as 1+ten-digits,
and will continue ot be dialed as such. 0+ten-digit dialing is also in
use for intra-809 and all NANP "Operator/Card/Special" calls (although
various 1-8YY- and special access code dialing is also in use; AT&T, MCI
and Sprint and others have had 1-800- "dial-ups" from the Dominican
Republic for Operator/Card services through their own platofrms, for
many years now).


+1-829-555-9999 is the test-number, and is scheduled for activation by
1-July-2005. I hope it does NOT "supervise". For one, calls to the
Dominican Republic would be billed as INTERNATIONAL/OVERSEAS (even on
discount plans) from the US (and Canada), NOT as "domestic" rates. And
the use of the '555' c.o.code (if the test number does indeed "supe")
would more likely mean a charge of "Customer-dialed Directory Assistance
in a NANP Area Code" which many US/Canadian/NANP-based carriers would
probably charge at $1.50 or $2.00 a call (since 829-555 would be
"assumed to be D.A."), which would be even more expensive than a one
minute call to the Dominican Republic.

It might have been better for Indotel/VeriZon/etc. to have selected a
test-number of something like 829-829-xxxx (or 829-809-xxxx) rather
than 829-555-xxxx.

There is also a list of Dominican Republic based telco contacts. The
four service providers/telcos listed include:

- VeriZon-Dominicana (the old GTE-CoDeTel)
(a few years back Puerto Rico Telephone was taken over by GTE, now part
of VeriZon)

- Centennial Dominicana (the old ITT-All America Cables & Radio)
(they are also quite active in Puerto Rico)

- Tricom S.A.

- Orange Dominicana


809 was created by AT&T in 1958 for Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands
and the Caribbean/Bermuda area. This was several years BEFORE the
ITU/CCITT came out with a worldwide Country Code scheme (now known as
Recommendation E.164) circa 1963/64. I would assume that AT&T intended
for other (now non-NANP) Caribbean areas to have been included in NPA
809, at that time, such as Cuba, Haiti, and the other French and Dutch
islands in the Caribbean. But for obvious political and also cultural
reasons, those areas never became part of +1/NANP, NPA 809.

Puerto Rico NPA 787 split from 809 in 1996 when the 809 Area Code for
the NANP-Caribbean/Bermuda began to split into nineteen unique
geo-political area codes. Bermuda (actually in the Atlantic area) was
the first to split from 809 in 1995, into NPA 441. St.Vincent & the
Grenadines was the last to split from 809 in Spring 1998, into NPA 784.
The use of 784 for St.Vincent/Grenadines became mandatory in Spring 1999
leaving 809 exclusively for the Dominican Republic.

In 2001, Puerto Rico's 787 was OVERLAID with 939.

And now 809 (exlusively) for the Dominican Republic is being overlaid,
with 829.

I wonder if +1-876 Jamaica is close to needing relief anytime soon?
But I doubt that +1-242 Bahamas or +1-868 Trinidad/Tobago are close to
needing relief anytime soon.

These five areas (Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Bahamas,
Trinidad/Tobago) have always been the largest users of NXX c.o.codes in
the NANP/Caribbean, i.e., the *OLD* 809 NPA prior to the later 1990s!


And finally, as reported in late July by Ray, Indotel's website has some
Spanish-only information on expansion of local/EAS calling within the
Dominican Republic found at this LOOOONNNNGGGG URL, which might wrap in
some mail readers:

http://www.indotel.org.do/Site/Boletin/notas_de_prensa/Boletin1/Declaracion_apro\
b_plan_TFE.htm

Mark J. Cuccia
mcuccia@...
mcuccia (at) tulane (dot) edu
New Orleans LA CSA
=========================================================================

The new area code to overlay 809 Dominican Republic is supposed to be
829.

There is an 809-829 c.o.code already in use in the Dominican Republic,
the lists I've seen show it as VeriZon (GTE-Codetel) and in the capital
of Santo Domingo DR.

Mandatory ten-digit intra-809 local dialing begins on 1-August-2005, but
the test number for the new 829 overlay NPA is scheduled to begin on
1-July-2005. This test number is to be 829-555-9999.

This appears to introduce a CODE/DIALING CONFLICT/AMBIGUITY...

where local calls to the 809-829 c.o.code in Santo Domingo, from those
locations which have local/EAS calling to Santo Domingo, might have a
three-to-five second post-dial-delay (until time-out) after dialing
829-xxxx (but that delay can be cancelled/cut-thru/timed-out
immediately with a trailing "pound/#" key), since the central office
won't necessarily know at that instant whether one is dialing 829-xxxx
as a seven-digit (still permissive) local call to 809-829-xxxx, or one
is dialing to the test number 829-555-9999 as a local number which will
most likely be in Santo Domingo DR!

There's nothing "unique" about this -- other NPA splits and overlays
ahve had similar nubmering/dialing/code conflicts/ambiguities, but IMO,
it still should have been investigated further in prior relief planning,
so as to avoid this from happening.

It will only last approximately one month, because mandatory ten-digit
intra-809 local dialing begins on 1-August-2005.

Of course, anything that is "toll" to the location of the test-number's
ratecenter, will have to dial 1+829-555-9999, and since I suspect that
829-555 will be associated with Santo Domingo, then calls to 809-829
will also have to be dialed as 1+809-829-xxxx, and thus, no code
conflict.

Any future overlay won't have any code-conflict regardless of what
digits the new NPA code will be, since ten-digit dialing will already be
MANDATORY for all calls (1+ten-d for "toll") -- that is not
unique/specific to the Dominican Republic, but rather to ANYWHERE in the
NANP.


mjc

Regarding the forthcoming 829 overlay area code for 809 in the Dominican
Republic, on Tuesday 3-August-2004, I wrote:

> I wonder if +1-876 Jamaica is close to needing relief anytime soon?
> But I doubt that +1-242 Bahamas or +1-868 Trinidad/Tobago are close to
> needing relief anytime soon.
>
> These five areas (Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica,
> Bahamas, Trinidad/Tobago) have always been the largest users of NXX
> c.o.codes in the NANP/Caribbean, i.e., the *OLD* 809 NPA prior to the
> later 1990s!


I don't know exactly how many 876-NXX c.o.codes are in use (or reserved,
or possibly even "flagged" for not-assignable) in Jamaica, but it "seems"
to be some 400+.

Anyhow, almost two years ago, on Thursday 12-September-2002, I had
posted the following regarding a Jamaica Numbering Plan document at the
website of the Jamaican "OUR", Office of Utility Regulation:


> I discovered these from doing some "google" searches on various telco
> things...

> The OUR (Office of Utility Regulation) in Jamaica (Caribbean) at
> http://www.our.org.jm/ has a .pdf document called "The Jamaican
> National Numbering Plan: A Consultative Document", located at
> http://www.our.org.jm/PDF-FILES/JNNPlan2.pdf

> I haven't read thru it yet -- it is 143 pages...

> There are also two "replies" documents:

> one from Cable & Wireless,
> http://www.our.org.jm/PDF-FILES/RESJNNP_CWJ.pdf

> and one from Digicel,
> http://www.our.org.jm/PDF-FILES/RESJNNP_DGCEL.pdf

> (both of these are much smaller)


And by going through the "OUR" website again today, Tuesday 3-August-2004,
I come across a more recent (but smaller) Numbering Plan document for
Jamaica... "The Jamaican National Numbering Plan: Determination Notice",
located at:  http://www.our.org.jm/PDF-FILES/NumPlanDetnov2003.pdf

This one is dated November 2003, and is only 37 pages long.

I haven't read thru this yet... I don't know if it proposes any future
NPA Relief for +1-876 though. Since +1-787 Puerto Rico was overlaid with
+1-939, and +1-809 Dominican Republic is scheduled to be overlaid with
+1-829, I wouldn't be surprised if at some point in the future, that
+1-876 Jamaica would choose to be *OVERLAID* with a new +1-NPA code.


Also, while I think it might be some time before +1-242 Bahamas would
need NPA Relief, I tend to think that the Bahamas would probably be more
inclined to choose a SPLIT. They are a series of numerous islands
(archipelago) scattered over quite a wide geographic territory in the
northwestern Caribbean.

And whenever in the future that +1-868 Trinidad/Tobago might need
relief, I would tend to think that they would probably choose an overlay
with a new +1-NPA code....


I haven't found any definitive websites for regualtory and/or numbering
for any of these other island-country members of the NANP, but
Neustar-NANPA *DOES* have a page at their website giving regulatory/
government/numbering (c.o.code)/etc. contact info for the various
member-countries of the NANP -- but ONLY names of personnel and their
phone/fax/postal/email info, not yet any "web" URL addresses for their
respective organizations):

http://www.nanpa.com/contact_us/nanp_country_contacts.html


Mark J. Cuccia
mcuccia (at) tulane (dot) edu
mcuccia@...
New Orleans LA CSA
=====================================================

Anyone follow the CRTC decision to reclaim the CO code 330 in area
code 819?

Couple of interesting points:

1)  There has been an ongoing dialing conflict with customers,
causing serious trouble in Moose Creek, Ottawa/Hull and Cornwall,
stemming from Axxent's failure.

2)  This CRTC ruling will force several customers to change their
numbers.  I am curious if anyone has other examples of this
happening in North America?  I know that in some countries,
customers 'buy' phone numbers, which they own, and can sell.

3)  The ruling has several references to 'database dipping' costing
carriers per dip.  Can anyone share more information about this
process?

CRTC ruling:
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Decisions/2004/dt2004-52.htm