[Dundi] representation

[Stastny Richard]

+1800 numbers are basically not normal phone numbers, they are IN service numbers,
wich are routed ny IN-translation to a greographic number
One feature of this service is that you may have this numbers routed depending on time
and date to different geo-numbers. You may also route depending in origin - thats whe
some consider them non-E.164 numbers. This is not true, they are.
 
Non-E.164 numbers are 911, 411 etc.
 
If the owner of the +1-800 knows exactly where he wnats the number to be routed on
the Internet, it may be used in DUNDi. One could consider this a origin Internet and
all calls are routed to the default call center. 800 numbers are also routed by freenum.org
or even in ENUM (in Austria 800 numbers are allowed in ENUM)
 
Richard

	-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- 
	Von: Bownes, Robert [mailto:Robert.Bownes at ogs.state.ny.us] 
	Gesendet: Di 26.10.2004 19:53 
	An: Distributed Universal Number Discovery 
	Cc: 
	Betreff: RE: [Dundi] representation
	
	
	Please forgive my original US centric answer....This all applies only to the US and other countries in the NANP. The rest of the world handles 0800 numbers differently (of course the US has to be different). 
	 
	There are two separate but related issues:
	 
	    +1.800 uniqueness
	    +1.800 routing
	 
	 
	In the NANP, toll free numbers (aka 800 numbers) are known as non geographic numbers, but geographic routing may still apply (by country), resulting in non routability in the 800 number pool. Interexchange carriers can also play routing games with 800 numbers based on a number of factors, including origin, time, etc.
	 
	I went and did some research and confirmed that in the past the numbers were unique within a lata, but today, the numbers are unique. 
	 
	 


  _____  

		From: Steve Kann [mailto:stevek at stevek.com] 
		Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 1:11 PM
		To: Distributed Universal Number Discovery
		Subject: Re: [Dundi] representation
		
		
		Florian Overkamp wrote: 

			Hi, 
			 
			Citeren "Bownes, Robert" <Robert.Bownes at ogs.state.ny.us> <mailto:Robert.Bownes at ogs.state.ny.us> : 
			  

				The problem with 800 numbers is that they are not unique. The same 800 
				number may be routed differently on a LATA or geographic basis. See 
				http://www.nanpa.com/nas/public/nonGeoNpasInServiceReport.do?method=disp 
				layNonGeoNpasInServiceReport for a list of the non geographic numbers. 
				    

			 
			Uhm, I'm not in the US, so correct me if I'm wrong, but in the Netherlands, the least 
			thing you can expect is that a 0800 number belongs to one organisation. Therefore, if 
			this organisation chooses to publish the number through DUNDi, they should never 
			have to expect conflicts with other organisations. They control the route (as they 
			should) and they can decide wether or not to deal with it in a certain way. We can also 
			choose what to do with 0800 numbers called by mobile users. This has two purposes: 
			the cost to accept the call is higher, but also we can route differently based on the 
			fact we have no clue about their whereabouts. 
			 
			I don't think this is a problem. People disclosing 0800 numbers through the e164 
			context in DUNDi should consider callers coming in on this route as 'roaming'. No 
			assumptions on whereabouts can be made. 
			 
			Or am I missing something here ?  
			  


		Yes,  if  Robert is correct, what you're missing is that "The problem with 800 numbers is that they are not unique".  So, for example, you could have a number +1 800 234 5678 which goes to one company when called from some US states, but goes to another company when called from other US states.
		
		I don't know if that is (still?) correct, but I do remember in the past my family's business needed to have a separate toll-free number for callers in 49 states, and a different number for callers in our home state, and that callers using the wrong one would not get through.
		
		I'm not sure if those numbers which were for in-state calls only were assigned to different entities in other states..  It seems pretty insane to do that, but who knows.  5 minutes of googling didn't seem to give me an answer..
		
		-SteveK
		
		

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 8426 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/dundi/attachments/20041026/7dcd46f4/attachment-0001.bin