[asterisk-users] PRI timing settings

[Jeff LaCoursiere]

Sadly none of these changes have made any difference.  I'll report the 
resolution for posterity once we find it.

Thanks,

j

On 08/20/2014 10:13 AM, Don Kelly wrote:
>
> It’s possible that Sprint is burping on the name. Try first dropping 
> the “1.”  Then try dropping the name also, if necessary.
>
> --Don
>
> *From:*asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com 
> [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] *On Behalf Of *Jeff 
> LaCoursiere
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 20, 2014 10:03 AM
> *To:* asterisk-users at lists.digium.com
> *Subject:* Re: [asterisk-users] PRI timing settings
>
>
> What about the text portion?  Should that never be sent?  I was indeed 
> sending the '1', and I will remove that to see if it solves my 
> problem, but I also have the company name in there.  I feel like a 
> newb asking such questions, but I've never had this issue before :)
>
> "Company" <1NXXNXXXXXX>
>
> Cheers,
>
> j
>
> On 08/20/2014 09:46 AM, Eric Wieling wrote:
>
>     NXXNXXXXXX is the correct format of CallerID numbers in NANPA. The
>     leading 1 is not part of any NANPA phone number. Toll free “area
>     codes” are also not valid for CallerID.
>
>     *From:*asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
>     <mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com>
>     [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] *On Behalf Of
>     *Jeff LaCoursiere
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, August 20, 2014 2:41 PM
>     *To:* asterisk-users at lists.digium.com
>     <mailto:asterisk-users at lists.digium.com>
>     *Subject:* Re: [asterisk-users] PRI timing settings
>
>     On 08/20/2014 07:58 AM, Scott L. Lykens wrote:
>
>         On Aug 19, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Jeff LaCoursiere <jeff at jeff.net
>         <mailto:jeff at jeff.net>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>         I wrote earlier today about a new PRI installation in the
>         Caribbean, where all outbound calls are functioning fine
>         *except* calls to Sprint phone numbers, which get rejected
>         immediately as "busy".
>
>         I don’t know what expectations for CLID your carrier might
>         have, or for that matter the upstream carrier, however, we
>         found through our CLEC here in the US that while the CLEC was
>         happy to take e.164 formatted numbers from us as CLID, Global
>         Crossing would reject them further upstream resulting in our
>         calls to many toll frees being rejected.
>
>         Switching to 10 digit CLID on all outbound calls through that
>         PRI solved the problem.
>
>         I don’t know if this is your problem but be sure your CLID is
>         in the most simple format possible for your region to help
>         rule it out.
>
>         sl
>
>
>     This makes me curious... what *is* the simplest format possible
>     for NANPA numbers?  I'm sure there must be a spec to conform to. 
>     Can anyone point me to it?
>
>     Cheers,
>
>     j
>
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20140820/d8105ae2/attachment.html>