[Dundi] representation

[Mark Spencer]

If the numbers are unique, then we're fine :)  If we can't deliver them, 
then we don't advertise them.

That just leaves the remaining 1-700 issue.

Mark

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Bownes, Robert wrote:

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