[asterisk-users] Country numbering plan resources

[SIP]

Michael wrote:
>
> Yes, but with an A-Z carrier, this can become risky when landline calls are 
> charged very differently to cellular calls, as is the case in NZ, Australia 
> and many other countries, unless someone is just a 'virtual' provider and 
> letting their up line do the invoices.
>
>   
Some of our providers have rates that don't change much (they've built 
in tolerance levels to them, so that if there's a fluctuation of 5c in 
one direction or another, it won't much matter.

Some of our providers pass us a new A-Z rate deck every WEEK. Including 
rate changes and prefix changes. Countries go from 5 prefixes to cover 
mobile, to 25, and then to 18, and then to 7, and then to 130...  
changing on a weekly basis (and sometimes daily in a few countries we 
deal with).

You'd need to get more than just the Asterisk community into this. You'd 
need an overall organisation of underlying carriers worldwide which 
could update their destinations whenever there's a change.

As a project, that's not only daunting technologically, but massively 
difficult politically. A lot of those UCs aren't going to WANT to join 
your coalition of information. After all, what's in it for them?

Add to that that the information it gives YOU is not going to be 
applicable on a grand scale. While the actual carrier who maintains 
prefixes 56-110 may change their structure on a weekly basis, it's 
possible the contracts they have with providers you'd be using have 
differing information available to the provider. Which means that just 
because something in the landscape changes, the rates may not change to 
you (or might change to YOU, but not to someone who uses a different 
provider that uses the same UC).

I'm not sure I can see the value of a community-driven effort to keep 
track of things which, by nature, are not applicable to everyone in the 
community, as we all have our own contracts with our own providers and 
our own set of rates based on our own conditions of traffic.

Perhaps you can explain better the value of the proposition in more detail.

N.