March 2020 - VoiceOps - lists.voiceops.org

News about surges in Traffic with AT&T and Verizon
by marylou＠backuptelecom.com March 20, 2020

March 20, 2020

I get e-mails from USTelecom Daily Lead and two of their articles were very interesting in light of the conversation about calls blocking yesterday. I thought you all might be interested because it explains a whole lot! MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Vestberg: Verizon prepared for surge in network traffic Date: 2020-03-20 12:58 PM From: "USTelecom dailyLead" <ustelecom at dailylead.com> To: marylou at backuptelecom.com News of the Day AT&T boosts capacity in spectrum-sharing deal [6] DISH Network is loaning AT&T 20 MHz of spectrum in the AWS-4 band, as well as its entire supply of 700 MHz airwaves, for two months. This is the third spectrum-sharing arrangement that the satellite provider has made since Sunday as telecoms prepare for extra traffic from people working at home. FULL STORY: FierceWireless [6] (3/19), PC Magazine [7] (3/19), The Verge [8] (3/19) [9] [10] [11] [12] Business & Industry Watch Vestberg: Verizon prepared for surge in network traffic [16] Verizon executives say their fiber and cellular-based networks have held up as web traffic has steadily grown in recent days as more people work from home and stay indoors. "We're always built for being prepared for different types of changes in the network," CEO Hans Vestberg told CNBC.

2 1

E911 - Working from home
by igoldstein＠telego.net March 20, 2020

March 20, 2020

how messy is this needing to change many E911 locations for Remote Employees -- Izzy Goldstein Chief Technology Officer Main: (212) 477-1000 x 2085 <(212)%20477-1000> Direct: (929) 477-2085 Website: www.telego.com <http://www.telego.net/> <http://www.telego.com/> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this e-mail in error please notify us immediately by email reply and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of TeleGo (T). Employees of TeleGo are expressly required not to make defamatory statements and not to infringe or authorize any infringement of copyright or any other legal right by email communications. Any such communication is contrary to TeleGo policy and outside the scope of the employment of the individual concerned. TeleGo will not accept any liability in respect of such communication, and the employee responsible will be personally liable for any damages or other liability arising. TeleGo Hosted PBX <https://youtu.be/DaT8YAZ4V0w>

6 7

Testing DTMF to known conference numbers
by compuwizz＠gmail.com March 19, 2020

March 19, 2020

At the end of the day yesterday I decided to test our product to make sure that our customers could reach conferencing services and not get FAS, excessive PDD or DTMF failures especially to international destinations. I went through old calendar invites that had a link to extra numbers for Microsoft Teams, Zoom, and an Iowa Freeconferencecall.com number. I'd like to test Cisco Webex but haven't found an invite with extra numbers for them yet. I don't know if the list of numbers are meant for public consumption or if the client is charged per minute of the call even outside of the conference room. Yesterday Simwood's blog highlighted what they were doing for their customers which included creating a jitsi meet instance (opensource webrtc videoconferencing and screen sharing software) on their infrastructure. https://blog.simwood.com/2020/03/remote-working-at-simwood-free-stuff/ I did the same for our customers as a beta "If it helps and works, I know little about this so no guarantees" service. Our small clients were very grateful so we'll see how it goes. If anyone manages a large conference service that I'm overlooking and either publishes numbers publicly, I'd like to test to make sure calls complete as expected (at a random time not the top and bottom of the hour). In an ideal world this would be a good use of a voice peering fabric but I understand call compensation and regulatory issues can get in the way of those orgs being successful. ~Jared Geiger

1 0

SD-WAN group
by David.Hiers＠cdk.com March 18, 2020

March 18, 2020

Hi, If you're interested in SD-WAN, I've started a NANOG-knockoff over on groups.io. https://groups.io/g/sdwanoperators it has all the usual SMTP controls: * Post: sdwanoperators at groups.io<mailto:sdwanoperators at groups.io> * Subscribe: sdwanoperators+subscribe at groups.io<mailto:sdwanoperators+subscribe at groups.io> * Unsubscribe: sdwanoperators+unsubscribe at groups.io<mailto:sdwanoperators+unsubscribe at groups.io> * Group Owner: sdwanoperators+owner at groups.io<mailto:sdwanoperators+owner at groups.io> * Help: sdwanoperators+help at groups.io<mailto:sdwanoperators+help at groups.io> Regards, David ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, notify the sender immediately by return email and delete the message and any attachments from your system.

1 0

NENA SIP Marking Specifications
by ml＠knight-networks.com March 18, 2020

March 18, 2020

I have been working to deploy a new private WAN for a customer that services E911 emergency calls delivered over VoIP. While working on this, I learned that their DSCP markings for SIP control traffic are AF12, not AF31 or CS3 which is what I typically see from our other enterprise customers. Media is still marked EF. These markings appear to have been standardized by a body called NENA, National Emergency Number Association. Googling 'NENA SIP "AF12"' returns the relevant PDFs. Below is a sample from their standards guide. DSCP | Use | PHB -----+----------------------------------+-------- 0 | Routine Traffic | Default 1 | 9-1-1 Signaling | AF12 2 | 9-1-1 Text Media | AF12 3 | 9-1-1 Audio Media | EF 4 | 9-1-1 Video Media | AF11 5 | 9-1-1 Non-human-initiated Call | AF21 6 | Intra ESInet* Events | AF21 7 | Intra ESInet Other 9-1-1 Traffic | AF22 (* Emergency Services IP Network) Does anyone know the reasoning behind specifying SIP as AF12 instead of AF31? While developing these standards, was NENA aware that AF12 tends to be prioritized lower than AF31 on most networks? Just trying to get some background on the decision. Thanks, -Brian

4 5

Discretionary HIPAA enforcement waiver for telemedicine
by abalashov＠evaristesys.com March 18, 2020

March 18, 2020

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/emergency-prepar… ? Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.

1 0

FCC May Require Telcos to Implement STIR/SHAKEN
by peter＠4isps.com March 16, 2020

March 16, 2020

FCC May Require Telcos to Implement STIR/SHAKEN for Ongoing Robocall Battle https://www.telecompetitor.com/fcc-may-require-telcos-to-implement-stir-sha… Thank you. Regards, Peter Radizeski @ RAD-INFO INC (813) 963-5884

1 0