Last November I posted re. my shared tenant environment and the incumbent LEC's inability to display each of my individula tenant's co. names for their own outbound calls. ( They cited privacy, marketing laws and 911 issues, but couldn't produce any documentation on the issues, so after many months of research & hairpulling, we have finally implemented and successfully tested the solution: Move all DID's to MCI PRI's. Program PBX to go to MCI as primary outbound route. Program the CLID's on each client's Meridian 2616 telephones (on an option 11C v25.40) to send out that client's main number on outbound calls. Provide MCI with the list of company names associated with each main number so they can place orders with their CNAM database provider (Verisign)to populate the CNAM dbase with that info. (They can not do personal names - it must be company names, but that's a lot easier to maintain anyway.)FYI, experience thus far shows that changes to the database will take at least two weeks to implement. If just one Tek-tip user benefits from this message, I'll be a happy phone-guy!
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations strongm on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Outbound caller ID, controlling the name(s) displayed 1
- Thread starter edmhtel
- Start date
- Status
Thanks for the followup. Sounds like a clean solution. Well done.
For this to work 2 things must happen:
1) The PRI must allows user provided (e.g. unscreened Calling Party Adresses). It would be quite interesting to call from one of your client's phones to an ISND line and look at the protocol trace to see if the MCI switch marks it as "user provided unscreened" or "User provided screened".
I have seen PRI's that will pass any numeric calling party address (like the call I got the other night from 888-888-8888). In others cases the user provided CPA is stripped off by the telco.
2) Your telco has to be willing to get all of your numbers into the correct database along with customer names - otherwise you would get number only.
BTW, with open sources VoIP caller ID spoofing is becoming more and more common.
Again, well done.
For this to work 2 things must happen:
1) The PRI must allows user provided (e.g. unscreened Calling Party Adresses). It would be quite interesting to call from one of your client's phones to an ISND line and look at the protocol trace to see if the MCI switch marks it as "user provided unscreened" or "User provided screened".
I have seen PRI's that will pass any numeric calling party address (like the call I got the other night from 888-888-8888). In others cases the user provided CPA is stripped off by the telco.
2) Your telco has to be willing to get all of your numbers into the correct database along with customer names - otherwise you would get number only.
BTW, with open sources VoIP caller ID spoofing is becoming more and more common.
Again, well done.
You are correct NX01, it doesn't. Sure you can spoof with a PBX, but there are relatively few PBXes out there and most reputable phone guys probably wouldn't do it for a customer (most of us phone guys still have a lingering fear of the Telco's...).
Guage this to the young hacker with Asterix running on a server in his/her bedroom. Before long there will be more of these than PBXes out there. SO the trend is growing....
Also, some telcos *do* screen, as I mentioned. Not sure that VoIP carriers will do this. The kid next door won't be on PRI, but on VoIP.
Speaking or weird things from no-traditional Telcos... A PRI customer is on a Time Warner PRI. The CO switch substitutes it's own CLID. o tthat unusual. But what is unusual is that it incldues a "1". As far as I am concerned a 1 is never party of the phone number, since it's use varies....
cheers
Guage this to the young hacker with Asterix running on a server in his/her bedroom. Before long there will be more of these than PBXes out there. SO the trend is growing....
Also, some telcos *do* screen, as I mentioned. Not sure that VoIP carriers will do this. The kid next door won't be on PRI, but on VoIP.
Speaking or weird things from no-traditional Telcos... A PRI customer is on a Time Warner PRI. The CO switch substitutes it's own CLID. o tthat unusual. But what is unusual is that it incldues a "1". As far as I am concerned a 1 is never party of the phone number, since it's use varies....
cheers
your right, post this in the nortel forum if you don't mind. the trick is to get the co to accept the data. it's easy enough to send the name, all my pri ties do. including merridian to cisco and merridian to rolm. merridian to dms, is more like trying to borrow the space shuttle. get the paperwork right and it happens. and thanks for the info, have a star on me
john poole
bellsouth business
columbia,sc
john poole
bellsouth business
columbia,sc
clid is almost the same way, i have 18 two way pri's, two of which go to a unique co, for a second path. they "can't" retransmit my clid, they can only send a single 1 xxx xxx xxxx number. the other 16, same central office switch and rls, send any dn in my did range that i send. i ask them to add a 1800 xxx xxxx and it took ten minutes,,, most of the trouble is the switchman, not the switch..imo
john poole
bellsouth business
columbia,sc
john poole
bellsouth business
columbia,sc
Since MCI is being aquired by Verizon it will be interesting to see how long that will last. Wasn't your original LEC Verizon?
It seems ever since "competition" the ILECs don't want to expand or change any feature capabilities of there switches or tariff offerings, except discontinue some of the features, like speedcall. Even though the features have been available in the switch for a long time. They won't even use LNP to port numbers in their own territory between COs! They want to charge you mileage instead......
....JIM....
It seems ever since "competition" the ILECs don't want to expand or change any feature capabilities of there switches or tariff offerings, except discontinue some of the features, like speedcall. Even though the features have been available in the switch for a long time. They won't even use LNP to port numbers in their own territory between COs! They want to charge you mileage instead......
....JIM....
-
1
- Thread starter
- #9
I will agree with you and give MCI alot of credit over the years. And I mean MCI --NOT-- Worldcom! I go back along way with MCI to the prebreakup of the Bell System. The company I worked for at the time hauled 60 circuits on our microwave from Palm Desert, CA for MCI. MCI has always been pretty flexible for the most part!
But I have also had to deal with CLECs that only wanted to mirror the ILEC and not budge! Paetec has been flexible from my experience.
But I have also had to deal with CLECs that only wanted to mirror the ILEC and not budge! Paetec has been flexible from my experience.
- Status
Similar threads
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question