We have one advertised phone number (vanity number) that customers call into. This number is permanently call forwarded to a group of 3 lines (on a different C.O. switch) coming into our PBX. We've discovered that the advertised number does not handle simultaneous call forwarding and the local provider wants to now charge us for 3 lines each with a call forwarding feature for the same number (advertised vanity number). Is there a better/cheaper way to accomplish the same thing?
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 gkittelson on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
simultaneous call forwarding
- Thread starter kako0223
- Start date
TouchToneTommy
Vendor
Remote Call Forwarding from the CO requires "Talk Paths" to have multiple calls forward. Yes, you pay per talk path.
- Thread starter
- #4
The call forwarding is from one C.O. to another C.O. The provider guaranteed that the function would work stating they had "true hunting" capability. We ended up switching from one provider to another only to find they had the same issue. NOW they are telling us we have to pay for additional lines (talk paths).
The CO Remote Call Forwarding feature has always been billed that way by the LECs. If you want 4 calls simultaneously, you pay for 4 talk paths plus usage. Some CLECs may have other billing arrangements.
If you want to eliminate those charges, some options would be to add the RCF number as a DID; provided you have such service, and your service provider will comply. You could establish the number as its own group of lines in hunting terminating on your system via a LEC or CLEC.
....JIM....
If you want to eliminate those charges, some options would be to add the RCF number as a DID; provided you have such service, and your service provider will comply. You could establish the number as its own group of lines in hunting terminating on your system via a LEC or CLEC.
....JIM....
- Thread starter
- #7
It is quite standard for a Telco to charge for a forwarded number and for concurrent paths. The cumulative cost typically being less than the same quantity of physical lines.
*******************************************************
Occam's Razor - All things being equal, the simplest solution is the right one.
*******************************************************
Occam's Razor - All things being equal, the simplest solution is the right one.
Most CLECs don't care what RATE AREA a number has, they just port it, either as a DID or establish a line(s) and bring it to the premise. With the LECs, they want to Foreign Exchange the number from CO to CO, not knowing who your provider is, I don't know what options may be available.
....JIM....
....JIM....
Phew, reading this I'm glad I live in the UK!
Our carriers will happilly pump as many calls as you can handle to you. Guess it comes down to the billing differences.
Robert Wilensky:
We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.
Our carriers will happilly pump as many calls as you can handle to you. Guess it comes down to the billing differences.
Robert Wilensky:
We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.
In defense (defence) of the ILEC's, and that is hard to believe (my defending an ILEC), pretend someone in France wants to forward a BT number to them for free. How happy would that be?
We don't have a universal phone company and we never did. I guess because of land mass, population, and just plain greed, we have different phone companies, and they don't like to give away service. They charge for multi-line RCF because they can
LkEErie
We don't have a universal phone company and we never did. I guess because of land mass, population, and just plain greed, we have different phone companies, and they don't like to give away service. They charge for multi-line RCF because they can
LkEErie
When RCF (Remote Call Forwarding) was originally introduced back in the late 1970s and 1980s, having multiple channels for hunting and the associated charges were established at that time. It also included usage charges, and the only way to bypass those were to RCF to a toll free number. Then there would only be the cost of toll free number, and no usage charge on the RCF.
....JIM....
....JIM....
You didn't "bypass" anything. Forwarding to an 800 number just cost in a different manner . Here's an SNET example. It translates to "put your money on the table and we'll take whatever we want"
LkEErie
. Here's an SNET example. It translates to "put your money on the table and we'll take whatever we want" LkEErie
Maybe that did not work in SNET territory, but it did in California, and the RCF had NO usage charges, only the basic service. The only usage was on the toll free (Inwats) service! One usage is cheaper than two or more!
Pacific Bell's tariff was different than SNET's. It allowed an RCF to 950, FGB service. Originally, PB had that restricted also, but we had that challenged by Execulines of Sacramento in the late 1980s, and the Cal PUC told PB to revise the tariff without that restriction and allow those types of service to use RCF.
....JIM....
Pacific Bell's tariff was different than SNET's. It allowed an RCF to 950, FGB service. Originally, PB had that restricted also, but we had that challenged by Execulines of Sacramento in the late 1980s, and the Cal PUC told PB to revise the tariff without that restriction and allow those types of service to use RCF.
....JIM....
We do it all the time to other countries, well we do with Colt, Virgin won't let us (cue bad jokes).
The way it works.
Caller calls Colt number. They are billed for this section and forwarding onto UK number cost us nothing. Revenue is shared between the telcos. When forwarding to another country, the revenue is split the same as for any other international call.
So Caller calls 08 number and is billed at that rate. Then we, as the owner, pick up any extra charges for sending the call onto another country. The carriers agree the tarrif between themselves (and the regulators), and revenue is split as such.
Needless to say, 99.99% of the time, we bring calls in locally and fire over to europe over our internal IP links, saving several hundred thousand £'s per year.
Robert Wilensky:
We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question