How do cellular carriers perform almost instant porting of number, and why can't landline providers do the same? For example if I take my Sprint cell phone to an AT&T store, and switch over to AT&T they can do this almost instantly. I met someone one time at a tradeshow claiming they could do same day porting for landline numbers just as the cellular industry did, but I was not sure how he was doing it or if it was a myth. I know cell systems are more automated and require a pin.
+1 I want to know! I'm betting it is the fact that Wireless Carriers were forced by the FCC to interconnect in order to do this, and that in most cases, ILECs and CLECs are not nearly so sophisticated, and therefore the process is wholely manual. Which means you have to wait for Susan to come in on her one-day-a-week day to process ports manually, and if something doesn't quite match exactly, Susan is to reject summarily. I hate porting. It's great for business, but it is a horrible and inefficient process in the US. On Tue, 9 Feb 2016, Colton Conor wrote:
How do cellular carriers perform almost instant porting of number, and why can't landline providers do the same? For example if I take my Sprint cell phone to an AT&T store, and switch over to AT&T they can do this almost instantly.
I met someone one time at a tradeshow claiming they could do same day porting for landline numbers just as the cellular industry did, but I was not sure how he was doing it or if it was a myth.
I know cell systems are more automated and require a pin.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our landline ports are instantaneous. (Or so we think.) It?s always been that way for us. I didn?t know there was any other way. Adam From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Colton Conor Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 2:52 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting How do cellular carriers perform almost instant porting of number, and why can't landline providers do the same? For example if I take my Sprint cell phone to an AT&T store, and switch over to AT&T they can do this almost instantly. I met someone one time at a tradeshow claiming they could do same day porting for landline numbers just as the cellular industry did, but I was not sure how he was doing it or if it was a myth. I know cell systems are more automated and require a pin.
If both carriers have a good business relationship and are willing to write matching orders in the NPAC (winning carrier makes the subscriptions, the losing carrier submits concurrence) you can port numbers in literally seconds. But we're not required to do things that fast so it rarely happens. Why move fast to let our customers leave when we can legally take our time and spend a couple days collecting more revenue from them? -Paul (DEFINITELY not speaking on behalf of my employer!) On 02/09/2016 04:24 PM, Adam Vocks wrote:
Our landline ports are instantaneous. (Or so we think.) It?s always been that way for us. I didn?t know there was any other way.
Adam
*From:*VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of *Colton Conor *Sent:* Tuesday, February 9, 2016 2:52 PM *To:* voiceops at voiceops.org *Subject:* [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
How do cellular carriers perform almost instant porting of number, and why can't landline providers do the same? For example if I take my Sprint cell phone to an AT&T store, and switch over to AT&T they can do this almost instantly.
I met someone one time at a tradeshow claiming they could do same day porting for landline numbers just as the cellular industry did, but I was not sure how he was doing it or if it was a myth.
I know cell systems are more automated and require a pin.
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Forget I said anything. You guys are talking about something different. I was referring to when our tech goes out to install our phone service, the LOA/FOC process is already complete and we just make a change to NPAC and calls start flowing in. Adam From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Paul Timmins Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:28 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting If both carriers have a good business relationship and are willing to write matching orders in the NPAC (winning carrier makes the subscriptions, the losing carrier submits concurrence) you can port numbers in literally seconds. But we're not required to do things that fast so it rarely happens. Why move fast to let our customers leave when we can legally take our time and spend a couple days collecting more revenue from them? -Paul (DEFINITELY not speaking on behalf of my employer!) On 02/09/2016 04:24 PM, Adam Vocks wrote: Our landline ports are instantaneous. (Or so we think.) Its always been that way for us. I didnt know there was any other way. Adam From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Colton Conor Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 2:52 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting How do cellular carriers perform almost instant porting of number, and why can't landline providers do the same? For example if I take my Sprint cell phone to an AT&T store, and switch over to AT&T they can do this almost instantly. I met someone one time at a tradeshow claiming they could do same day porting for landline numbers just as the cellular industry did, but I was not sure how he was doing it or if it was a myth. I know cell systems are more automated and require a pin. _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Yeah, they are talking about wireless ports, where between carriers, you can achieve same-day FOC within minutes of the end-user requesting a port-out. So, from the very very beginning to the very very end, it is measured in minutes instead of days. -- Nathan ________________________________________ From: VoiceOps [voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Adam Vocks [Adam.Vocks at cticomputers.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 1:32 PM To: Paul Timmins; voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting Forget I said anything. You guys are talking about something different. I was referring to when our tech goes out to install our phone service, the LOA/FOC process is already complete and we just make a change to NPAC and calls start flowing in. Adam From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Paul Timmins Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:28 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting If both carriers have a good business relationship and are willing to write matching orders in the NPAC (winning carrier makes the subscriptions, the losing carrier submits concurrence) you can port numbers in literally seconds. But we're not required to do things that fast so it rarely happens. Why move fast to let our customers leave when we can legally take our time and spend a couple days collecting more revenue from them? -Paul (DEFINITELY not speaking on behalf of my employer!) On 02/09/2016 04:24 PM, Adam Vocks wrote: Our landline ports are instantaneous. (Or so we think.) Its always been that way for us. I didnt know there was any other way. Adam From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Colton Conor Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 2:52 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org<mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting How do cellular carriers perform almost instant porting of number, and why can't landline providers do the same? For example if I take my Sprint cell phone to an AT&T store, and switch over to AT&T they can do this almost instantly. I met someone one time at a tradeshow claiming they could do same day porting for landline numbers just as the cellular industry did, but I was not sure how he was doing it or if it was a myth. I know cell systems are more automated and require a pin. _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org<mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Wow. Try porting a large customer from AT&T... oh, that's not a simple port, that's a project. And, one number isn't in our database, so we can't do it. Or, the physical location doesn't match, so we can't do it. -----Original Message----- From: "Adam Vocks" <Adam.Vocks at cticomputers.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 4:24pm To: "Colton Conor" <colton.conor at gmail.com>, voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting Our landline ports are instantaneous. (Or so we think.) It?s always been that way for us. I didn?t know there was any other way. Adam From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Colton Conor Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 2:52 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting How do cellular carriers perform almost instant porting of number, and why can't landline providers do the same? For example if I take my Sprint cell phone to an AT&T store, and switch over to AT&T they can do this almost instantly. I met someone one time at a tradeshow claiming they could do same day porting for landline numbers just as the cellular industry did, but I was not sure how he was doing it or if it was a myth. I know cell systems are more automated and require a pin.
This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline. The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others. Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction. -------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
One would think that the incentives would diverge depending on whether the given wireless operator expects to be a net beneficiary of porting in or a net loser to porting out -- a function of their market position, which is not equal. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
A lot of it goes into literally 4 companies working together to have automation. I don't know that process would scale if it was hundreds of companies trying to accomplish the same thing without a clearinghouse in the middle and everyone talking the same language. ? Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / carlos at race.com / http://www.race.com ________________________________________ From: VoiceOps <voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org> on behalf of Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:02 PM To: Alexander Lopez; voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting One would think that the incentives would diverge depending on whether the given wireless operator expects to be a net beneficiary of porting in or a net loser to porting out -- a function of their market position, which is not equal. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
A lot of it also comes down to cellular portability being required by the FCC to process ports in 4 hours or less from the day it was started as well. The FCC saw how wireline worked and said they weren't going to have that on wireless. Shortly after they cleaned up wireline (it used to be much worse!), and then introduced rules for intermodal ports. On Feb 9, 2016 20:43, Carlos Alcantar <carlos at race.com> wrote:
A lot of it goes into literally 4 companies working together to have automation.? I don't know that process would scale if it was hundreds of companies trying to accomplish the same thing without a clearinghouse in the middle and everyone talking the same language.
? Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / carlos at race.com / http://www.race.com
________________________________________ From: VoiceOps <voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org> on behalf of Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:02 PM To: Alexander Lopez; voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
One would think that the incentives would diverge depending on whether the given wireless operator expects to be a net beneficiary of porting in or a net loser to porting out -- a function of their market position, which is not equal.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
So what is the best case senario under todays rules for wireline carriers? Lets assume we are talking about a CLEC with their own switch and number pool porting away from the incumbend ILEC (Verizon or AT&T wireline). Assume the CLEC has access to NPAC. How does this process even work? Today we just have our customer sign an loa, and then upload the LOA to our wholesaler. They take it from there, but I would like to know the process and what is involved. Does each carrier have their own system to verifying that the number and account number belongs to the said provider? On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Paul Timmins <paul at timmins.net> wrote:
A lot of it also comes down to cellular portability being required by the FCC to process ports in 4 hours or less from the day it was started as well. The FCC saw how wireline worked and said they weren't going to have that on wireless. Shortly after they cleaned up wireline (it used to be much worse!), and then introduced rules for intermodal ports.
On Feb 9, 2016 20:43, Carlos Alcantar <carlos at race.com> wrote:
A lot of it goes into literally 4 companies working together to have
automation. I don't know that process would scale if it was hundreds of companies trying to accomplish the same thing without a clearinghouse in the middle and everyone talking the same language.
? Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / carlos at race.com / http://www.race.com
________________________________________ From: VoiceOps <voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org> on behalf of Alex
Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:02 PM To: Alexander Lopez; voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
One would think that the incentives would diverge depending on whether the given wireless operator expects to be a net beneficiary of porting in or a net loser to porting out -- a function of their market position, which is not equal.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
"Formal" process is that your CLEC looks at your LOA, tucks it in a drawer after a cursory glance (hopefully they at least look at it), then submits a LSR (electronically or via excel spreadsheet) to the losing carrier. The losing carrier gives an FOC within 24 hours for usually within 3 days (or whenever they request the due date to be). Your CLEC builds the NPAC subscriptions, the losing carrier might or might not concur them (concurrence timers in the NPAC are out of scope for this question). On the due date, the new carrier clicks activate in LTI (or sends an EDI message into the LSMS using their mechanized interfaces) and the national databases update within a few seconds (some may take a minute or two, ugh, unless they're disconnected and your number could be stuck in that LSMS for up to 24 hours). The losing carrier pulls out the routes/translations/whatever from their switch and issues a final bill. Technically and legally, nothing stops your new carrier from calling a buddy at the old carrier, saying: Winning: "hey john can we port this #, we have an LOA" Losing: "sure, let me get into NPAC. create the subscription for now and i'll concur it" Both carriers: *tap tap tap* Losing: "okay i granted concurrence" Winning: "thanks buddy, I just activated it, you can clean up your routes now" Losing: "no problem great to hear from you!" Winning: "lunch tomorrow?" Losing: "sure!" That actually meets FCC requirements. It doesn't meet ATIS recommendations but they're only recommendations (mostly put in place by people who really like the status quo). -Paul
On Feb 10, 2016, at 08:14, Colton Conor <colton.conor at gmail.com> wrote:
So what is the best case senario under todays rules for wireline carriers? Lets assume we are talking about a CLEC with their own switch and number pool porting away from the incumbend ILEC (Verizon or AT&T wireline). Assume the CLEC has access to NPAC.
How does this process even work? Today we just have our customer sign an loa, and then upload the LOA to our wholesaler. They take it from there, but I would like to know the process and what is involved. Does each carrier have their own system to verifying that the number and account number belongs to the said provider?
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Paul Timmins <paul at timmins.net <mailto:paul at timmins.net>> wrote: A lot of it also comes down to cellular portability being required by the FCC to process ports in 4 hours or less from the day it was started as well. The FCC saw how wireline worked and said they weren't going to have that on wireless. Shortly after they cleaned up wireline (it used to be much worse!), and then introduced rules for intermodal ports.
On Feb 9, 2016 20:43, Carlos Alcantar <carlos at race.com <mailto:carlos at race.com>> wrote:
A lot of it goes into literally 4 companies working together to have automation. I don't know that process would scale if it was hundreds of companies trying to accomplish the same thing without a clearinghouse in the middle and everyone talking the same language.
? Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 Phone: +1 415 376 3314 <tel:%2B1%20415%20376%203314> / carlos at race.com <mailto:carlos at race.com> / http://www.race.com <http://www.race.com/>
________________________________________ From: VoiceOps <voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org <mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org>> on behalf of Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com>> Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2016 3:02 PM To: Alexander Lopez; voiceops at voiceops.org <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
One would think that the incentives would diverge depending on whether the given wireless operator expects to be a net beneficiary of porting in or a net loser to porting out -- a function of their market position, which is not equal.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 <tel:%2B1-800-250-5920> (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 <tel:%2B1-678-954-0671> (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ <http://www.evaristesys.com/>, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ <http://www.csrpswitch.com/> _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops <https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops>
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops <https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops>
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops <https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops>
Exactly this. I actually ported my personal cell number to Verizon from ATT yesterday. Gave the rep my ATT account number, He 30 seconds later asked me for the PIN I set on my ATT account. I provided and my number was working before I hit the door on the way out. Total port time was <5 Min. I questioned the Rep if this was always the case and he said only if porting from Sprint/ATT/T-Mobile. And that basically any other carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days. Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting. I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their best interest to work together. Not to mention, By automating the process. They don't have to keep an entire call center worth of LNP personnel to handle their volume. Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106 ---------------------------------------- From: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lopez at opsys.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM To: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov at evaristesys.com>, "voiceops at voiceops.org" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline. The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others. Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction. -------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Some of that may have to do with Syniverse being the porting engine for those 3. On 2/10/2016 9:57 AM, Nick Olsen wrote:
Exactly this. I actually ported my personal cell number to Verizon from ATT yesterday. Gave the rep my ATT account number, He 30 seconds later asked me for the PIN I set on my ATT account. I provided and my number was working before I hit the door on the way out. Total port time was <5 Min. I questioned the Rep if this was always the case and he said only if porting from Sprint/ATT/T-Mobile. And that basically any other carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days. Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting. I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their best interest to work together. Not to mention, By automating the process. They don't have to keep an entire call center worth of LNP personnel to handle their volume.
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From*: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lopez at opsys.com> *Sent*: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM *To*: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov at evaristesys.com>, "voiceops at voiceops.org" <voiceops at voiceops.org> *Subject*: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline. The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others. Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction.
-------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ <http://www.csrpswitch.com/> _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
I really wonder if the big wireless carriers follow the same process that wireline carriers do because the typical wireline process takes more than 5 minutes to complete. The whole process is: 1. Issue an LSR order to the losing carrier requesting the port. 2. When you get confirmation, submit the port request in NPAC (or a SOA system connected to NPAC) 3. Losing carrier confirms the port 4. Winning carrier accepts the port The greatest portion of time is spent on getting the losing carrier to accept the LSR and give confirmation, so I'm thinking these wireless carriers must have agreements set up between them that allows them to bypass the LSR process and just complete the NPAC work! Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
On February 10, 2016 at 9:57 AM Nick Olsen <nick at flhsi.com> wrote:
Exactly this.
I actually ported my personal cell number to Verizon from ATT yesterday.
Gave the rep my ATT account number, He 30 seconds later asked me for the PIN I set on my ATT account. I provided and my number was working before I hit the door on the way out. Total port time was <5 Min.
I questioned the Rep if this was always the case and he said only if porting from Sprint/ATT/T-Mobile. And that basically any other carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days. Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting.
I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their best interest to work together.
Not to mention, By automating the process. They don't have to keep an entire call center worth of LNP personnel to handle their volume.
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
--------------------------------------------- From: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lopez at opsys.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM To: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov at evaristesys.com>, "voiceops at voiceops.org" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline.
The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others.
Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction.
-------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ <http://www.csrpswitch.com/> _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
My understanding is that the winning carrier submits the subscription, issues an electronic WPR (https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf) - similar to an LSR. The losing carrier verifies the WPR's accuracy (TN/PIN/Address/Zip) and issues a confirmation and concurrence, and then the winning carrier electronically activates in SOA. Given this is 100% electronic (and all the majors use Syniverse for their SOA) it's immediate. Wireless carriers don't really have to worry about things like "do they have complex services like DSL, FTTH with bundle packaging, etc". They just drop the customer's subscriber information out of the switch and send a final bill. -Paul On 02/10/2016 11:50 AM, Mary Lou Carey wrote:
I really wonder if the big wireless carriers follow the same process that wireline carriers do because the typical wireline process takes more than 5 minutes to complete. The whole process is: 1. Issue an LSR order to the losing carrier requesting the port. 2. When you get confirmation, submit the port request in NPAC (or a SOA system connected to NPAC) 3. Losing carrier confirms the port 4. Winning carrier accepts the port The greatest portion of time is spent on getting the losing carrier to accept the LSR and give confirmation, so I'm thinking these wireless carriers must have agreements set up between them that allows them to bypass the LSR process and just complete the NPAC work! Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
On February 10, 2016 at 9:57 AM Nick Olsen <nick at flhsi.com> wrote:
Exactly this. I actually ported my personal cell number to Verizon from ATT yesterday. Gave the rep my ATT account number, He 30 seconds later asked me for the PIN I set on my ATT account. I provided and my number was working before I hit the door on the way out. Total port time was <5 Min. I questioned the Rep if this was always the case and he said only if porting from Sprint/ATT/T-Mobile. And that basically any other carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days. Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting. I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their best interest to work together. Not to mention, By automating the process. They don't have to keep an entire call center worth of LNP personnel to handle their volume.
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From*: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lopez at opsys.com> *Sent*: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM *To*: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov at evaristesys.com>, "voiceops at voiceops.org" <voiceops at voiceops.org> *Subject*: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline. The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others. Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction.
-------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ <http://www.csrpswitch.com/> _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
I couldn't pull up the WPR, but obviously their WPR is nothing like an LSR, which is all written in code and requires a bunch of fields that verify way more than just the TN/PIN/Address/ZIP accuracy. My guess is that it doesn't require a lot of training to teach someone how to fill out a WPRs because they're in English and to the point. Unlike LSRs that you need an LSOG guide to understand what it's asking for, hours of training to know which fields to populate, and the patience of a saint to fight your way through the process! Sounds like WPRs is the form that all carriers should use to simplify the process, but then iconectiv would be out of business and it would make it way easier for carriers to port numbers away from the ILECs so I don't see that happening without a fight. I guess I should be thankful because it gives people like me a job, but the whole ASR/LSR process just seems stupid to me - like reading the bible in Latin to a group of people who only speak English! Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
On February 10, 2016 at 12:00 PM Paul Timmins <paul at timmins.net> wrote:
My understanding is that the winning carrier submits the subscription, issues an electronic WPR (https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR <https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf> .pdf <https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf> ) - similar to an LSR. The losing carrier verifies the WPR's accuracy (TN/PIN/Address/Zip) and issues a confirmation and concurrence, and then the winning carrier electronically activates in SOA.
Given this is 100% electronic (and all the majors use Syniverse for their SOA) it's immediate. Wireless carriers don't really have to worry about things like "do they have complex services like DSL, FTTH with bundle packaging, etc". They just drop the customer's subscriber information out of the switch and send a final bill.
-Paul
On 02/10/2016 11:50 AM, Mary Lou Carey wrote:
> > I really wonder if the big wireless carriers follow the same > > process that wireline carriers do because the typical wireline > > process takes more than 5 minutes to complete. The whole process is:
1. Issue an LSR order to the losing carrier requesting the port. 2. When you get confirmation, submit the port request in NPAC (or a SOA system connected to NPAC) 3. Losing carrier confirms the port 4. Winning carrier accepts the port
The greatest portion of time is spent on getting the losing carrier to accept the LSR and give confirmation, so I'm thinking these wireless carriers must have agreements set up between them that allows them to bypass the LSR process and just complete the NPAC work!
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
> > > On February 10, 2016 at 9:57 AM Nick Olsen <nick at flhsi.com> > > > <mailto:nick at flhsi.com> wrote:
Exactly this.
I actually ported my personal cell number to Verizon from ATT yesterday.
Gave the rep my ATT account number, He 30 seconds later asked me for the PIN I set on my ATT account. I provided and my number was working before I hit the door on the way out. Total port time was <5 Min.
I questioned the Rep if this was always the case and he said only if porting from Sprint/ATT/T-Mobile. And that basically any other carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days. Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting.
I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their best interest to work together.
Not to mention, By automating the process. They don't have to keep an entire call center worth of LNP personnel to handle their volume.
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
--------------------------------------------- From: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lopez at opsys.com> <mailto:alex.lopez at opsys.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM To: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov at evaristesys.com> <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com> , "voiceops at voiceops.org" <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> <voiceops at voiceops.org> <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline.
The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others.
Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction.
-------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ <http://www.csrpswitch.com/> _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> >
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com <mailto:Marylou at backuptelecom.com> Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
That's why I hired your firm ML!!! You know how to deal with these issues and get it done. Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 10, 2016, at 11:20 AM, Mary Lou Carey <marylou at backuptelecom.com> wrote:
I couldn't pull up the WPR, but obviously their WPR is nothing like an LSR, which is all written in code and requires a bunch of fields that verify way more than just the TN/PIN/Address/ZIP accuracy.
My guess is that it doesn't require a lot of training to teach someone how to fill out a WPRs because they're in English and to the point. Unlike LSRs that you need an LSOG guide to understand what it's asking for, hours of training to know which fields to populate, and the patience of a saint to fight your way through the process! Sounds like WPRs is the form that all carriers should use to simplify the process, but then iconectiv would be out of business and it would make it way easier for carriers to port numbers away from the ILECs so I don't see that happening without a fight. I guess I should be thankful because it gives people like me a job, but the whole ASR/LSR process just seems stupid to me - like reading the bible in Latin to a group of people who only speak English!
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
On February 10, 2016 at 12:00 PM Paul Timmins <paul at timmins.net> wrote:
My understanding is that the winning carrier submits the subscription, issues an electronic WPR (https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf) - similar to an LSR. The losing carrier verifies the WPR's accuracy (TN/PIN/Address/Zip) and issues a confirmation and concurrence, and then the winning carrier electronically activates in SOA.
Given this is 100% electronic (and all the majors use Syniverse for their SOA) it's immediate. Wireless carriers don't really have to worry about things like "do they have complex services like DSL, FTTH with bundle packaging, etc". They just drop the customer's subscriber information out of the switch and send a final bill.
-Paul
On 02/10/2016 11:50 AM, Mary Lou Carey wrote: I really wonder if the big wireless carriers follow the same process that wireline carriers do because the typical wireline process takes more than 5 minutes to complete. The whole process is:
1. Issue an LSR order to the losing carrier requesting the port. 2. When you get confirmation, submit the port request in NPAC (or a SOA system connected to NPAC) 3. Losing carrier confirms the port 4. Winning carrier accepts the port
The greatest portion of time is spent on getting the losing carrier to accept the LSR and give confirmation, so I'm thinking these wireless carriers must have agreements set up between them that allows them to bypass the LSR process and just complete the NPAC work!
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
On February 10, 2016 at 9:57 AM Nick Olsen <nick at flhsi.com> wrote:
Exactly this.
I actually ported my personal cell number to Verizon from ATT yesterday.
Gave the rep my ATT account number, He 30 seconds later asked me for the PIN I set on my ATT account. I provided and my number was working before I hit the door on the way out. Total port time was <5 Min.
I questioned the Rep if this was always the case and he said only if porting from Sprint/ATT/T-Mobile. And that basically any other carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days. Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting.
I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their best interest to work together.
Not to mention, By automating the process. They don't have to keep an entire call center worth of LNP personnel to handle their volume.
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
From: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lopez at opsys.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM To: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov at evaristesys.com>, "voiceops at voiceops.org" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline.
The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others.
Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction.
-------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Thanks Anthony! I'm quite sure my parents didn't have as much of an appreciation for my stubborn "I'm going to find a way to make this happen" attitude as my CLEC clients do! LOL! Mary Lou
On February 10, 2016 at 12:22 PM Anthony Orlando <avorlando at yahoo.com> wrote:
That's why I hired your firm ML!!! You know how to deal with these issues and get it done.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 10, 2016, at 11:20 AM, Mary Lou Carey <marylou at backuptelecom.com <mailto:marylou at backuptelecom.com> > wrote:
> > I couldn't pull up the WPR, but obviously their WPR is nothing > > like an LSR, which is all written in code and requires a bunch of > > fields that verify way more than just the TN/PIN/Address/ZIP > > accuracy.
My guess is that it doesn't require a lot of training to teach someone how to fill out a WPRs because they're in English and to the point. Unlike LSRs that you need an LSOG guide to understand what it's asking for, hours of training to know which fields to populate, and the patience of a saint to fight your way through the process! Sounds like WPRs is the form that all carriers should use to simplify the process, but then iconectiv would be out of business and it would make it way easier for carriers to port numbers away from the ILECs so I don't see that happening without a fight. I guess I should be thankful because it gives people like me a job, but the whole ASR/LSR process just seems stupid to me - like reading the bible in Latin to a group of people who only speak English!
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
> > > On February 10, 2016 at 12:00 PM Paul Timmins <paul at timmins.net > > > <mailto:paul at timmins.net> > wrote:
My understanding is that the winning carrier submits the subscription, issues an electronic WPR (https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR <https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf> .pdf <https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf> ) - similar to an LSR. The losing carrier verifies the WPR's accuracy (TN/PIN/Address/Zip) and issues a confirmation and concurrence, and then the winning carrier electronically activates in SOA.
> >
> > >
Given this is 100% electronic (and all the majors use Syniverse for their SOA) it's immediate. Wireless carriers don't really have to worry about things like "do they have complex services like DSL, FTTH with bundle packaging, etc". They just drop the customer's subscriber information out of the switch and send a final bill.
-Paul
On 02/10/2016 11:50 AM, Mary Lou Carey wrote:
> > > > I really wonder if the big wireless carriers > > > > follow the same process that wireline carriers do > > > > because the typical wireline process takes more than 5 > > > > minutes to complete. The whole process is:
1. Issue an LSR order to the losing carrier requesting the port. 2. When you get confirmation, submit the port request in NPAC (or a SOA system connected to NPAC) 3. Losing carrier confirms the port 4. Winning carrier accepts the port
The greatest portion of time is spent on getting the losing carrier to accept the LSR and give confirmation, so I'm thinking these wireless carriers must have agreements set up between them that allows them to bypass the LSR process and just complete the NPAC work!
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
> > > > > On February 10, 2016 at 9:57 AM Nick Olsen > > > > > <nick at flhsi.com> <mailto:nick at flhsi.com> wrote:
Exactly this.
I actually ported my personal cell number to Verizon from ATT yesterday.
Gave the rep my ATT account number, He 30 seconds later asked me for the PIN I set on my ATT account. I provided and my number was working before I hit the door on the way out. Total port time was <5 Min.
I questioned the Rep if this was always the case and he said only if porting from Sprint/ATT/T-Mobile. And that basically any other carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days. Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting.
I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their best interest to work together.
Not to mention, By automating the process. They don't have to keep an entire call center worth of LNP personnel to handle their volume.
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
--------------------------------------------- From: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lopez at opsys.com> <mailto:alex.lopez at opsys.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM To: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov at evaristesys.com> <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com> , "voiceops at voiceops.org" <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> <voiceops at voiceops.org> <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline.
The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others.
Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction.
-------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ <http://www.csrpswitch.com/> _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> > > >
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com <mailto:Marylou at backuptelecom.com> Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> > >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> >
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com <mailto:Marylou at backuptelecom.com> Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
> > _______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20160210/b2d213a5/att...>
That's funny!
On February 10, 2016 at 2:17 PM Paul Timmins <paul at timmins.net> wrote:
How about a Vatican II for LNP processes, eh?
On Wed, 02/10/2016 12:20 PM, Mary Lou Carey <marylou at backuptelecom.com> wrote:
> > I couldn't pull up the WPR, but obviously their WPR is nothing > > like an LSR, which is all written in code and requires a bunch of > > fields that verify way more than just the TN/PIN/Address/ZIP accuracy.
My guess is that it doesn't require a lot of training to teach someone how to fill out a WPRs because they're in English and to the point. Unlike LSRs that you need an LSOG guide to understand what it's asking for, hours of training to know which fields to populate, and the patience of a saint to fight your way through the process! Sounds like WPRs is the form that all carriers should use to simplify the process, but then iconectiv would be out of business and it would make it way easier for carriers to port numbers away from the ILECs so I don't see that happening without a fight. I guess I should be thankful because it gives people like me a job, but the whole ASR/LSR process just seems stupid to me - like reading the bible in Latin to a group of people who only speak English!
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
> > > On February 10, 2016 at 12:00 PM Paul Timmins <paul at timmins.net> > > > wrote:
My understanding is that the winning carrier submits the subscription, issues an electronic WPR (https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR <https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf> .pdf <https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf> ) - similar to an LSR. The losing carrier verifies the WPR's accuracy (TN/PIN/Address/Zip) and issues a confirmation and concurrence, and then the winning carrier electronically activates in SOA.
> >
> > >
Given this is 100% electronic (and all the majors use Syniverse for their SOA) it's immediate. Wireless carriers don't really have to worry about things like "do they have complex services like DSL, FTTH with bundle packaging, etc". They just drop the customer's subscriber information out of the switch and send a final bill.
-Paul
On 02/10/2016 11:50 AM, Mary Lou Carey wrote:
> > > > I really wonder if the big wireless carriers > > > > follow the same process that wireline carriers do because > > > > the typical wireline process takes more than 5 minutes to > > > > complete. The whole process is:
1. Issue an LSR order to the losing carrier requesting the port. 2. When you get confirmation, submit the port request in NPAC (or a SOA system connected to NPAC) 3. Losing carrier confirms the port 4. Winning carrier accepts the port
The greatest portion of time is spent on getting the losing carrier to accept the LSR and give confirmation, so I'm thinking these wireless carriers must have agreements set up between them that allows them to bypass the LSR process and just complete the NPAC work!
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
> > > > > On February 10, 2016 at 9:57 AM Nick Olsen > > > > > <nick at flhsi.com> <mailto:nick at flhsi.com> wrote:
Exactly this.
I actually ported my personal cell number to Verizon from ATT yesterday.
Gave the rep my ATT account number, He 30 seconds later asked me for the PIN I set on my ATT account. I provided and my number was working before I hit the door on the way out. Total port time was <5 Min.
I questioned the Rep if this was always the case and he said only if porting from Sprint/ATT/T-Mobile. And that basically any other carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days. Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting.
I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their best interest to work together.
Not to mention, By automating the process. They don't have to keep an entire call center worth of LNP personnel to handle their volume.
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
--------------------------------------------- From: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lopez at opsys.com> <mailto:alex.lopez at opsys.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM To: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov at evaristesys.com> <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com> , "voiceops at voiceops.org" <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> <voiceops at voiceops.org> <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline.
The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others.
Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction.
-------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ <http://www.csrpswitch.com/> _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> > > >
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com <mailto:Marylou at backuptelecom.com> Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> > >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> >
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
+1 for Paul Timmins - Hehe it happens like that every day all day buddy. Lunch tomorrow had me cracking up. The wireless porting is so fast and seem less 1. Because the FCC mandated it. 2. You can count the wireless carriers on both hands vs CLEC, ILEC, and Rural Carriers. 3. Syniverse is the clearing house. 4. They require an LSR but it's 100% automated from a non system knowledgeable sales person aspect. There are only 4 primary fields needed to port and the magic is done in seconds because there is minimal human interaction. Databases running fully on hypervisors processing the request. I've ported for multiple carriers in different Regions. Wireless is the easiest once you have the databases established. Erik Flournoy 808-426-4527 301-218-7325 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail message, including any attachments from EESPRO.com - contain information which is CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. The information is intended only for the use of the individual named above and may not be disseminated to any other party without written permission. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, disclosure, distribution, copying or taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this e-mailed information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify info at eespro.com, and permanently delete this e-mail and the attachments hereto, if any, and destroy any printout thereof. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Mary Lou Carey <marylou at backuptelecom.com> wrote:
That's funny!
On February 10, 2016 at 2:17 PM Paul Timmins <paul at timmins.net> wrote:
How about a Vatican II for LNP processes, eh?
On Wed, 02/10/2016 12:20 PM, Mary Lou Carey <marylou at backuptelecom.com> wrote:
I couldn't pull up the WPR, but obviously their WPR is nothing like an LSR, which is all written in code and requires a bunch of fields that verify way more than just the TN/PIN/Address/ZIP accuracy.
My guess is that it doesn't require a lot of training to teach someone how to fill out a WPRs because they're in English and to the point. Unlike LSRs that you need an LSOG guide to understand what it's asking for, hours of training to know which fields to populate, and the patience of a saint to fight your way through the process! Sounds like WPRs is the form that all carriers should use to simplify the process, but then iconectiv would be out of business and it would make it way easier for carriers to port numbers away from the ILECs so I don't see that happening without a fight. I guess I should be thankful because it gives people like me a job, but the whole ASR/LSR process just seems stupid to me - like reading the bible in Latin to a group of people who only speak English!
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
On February 10, 2016 at 12:00 PM Paul Timmins <paul at timmins.net> wrote:
My understanding is that the winning carrier submits the subscription, issues an electronic WPR (https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR <https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf>.pdf <https://www.syniverse.com/files/Single_Line_WPR.pdf>) - similar to an LSR. The losing carrier verifies the WPR's accuracy (TN/PIN/Address/Zip) and issues a confirmation and concurrence, and then the winning carrier electronically activates in SOA.
Given this is 100% electronic (and all the majors use Syniverse for their SOA) it's immediate. Wireless carriers don't really have to worry about things like "do they have complex services like DSL, FTTH with bundle packaging, etc". They just drop the customer's subscriber information out of the switch and send a final bill.
-Paul
On 02/10/2016 11:50 AM, Mary Lou Carey wrote:
I really wonder if the big wireless carriers follow the same process that wireline carriers do because the typical wireline process takes more than 5 minutes to complete. The whole process is:
1. Issue an LSR order to the losing carrier requesting the port. 2. When you get confirmation, submit the port request in NPAC (or a SOA system connected to NPAC) 3. Losing carrier confirms the port 4. Winning carrier accepts the port
The greatest portion of time is spent on getting the losing carrier to accept the LSR and give confirmation, so I'm thinking these wireless carriers must have agreements set up between them that allows them to bypass the LSR process and just complete the NPAC work!
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting 615-791-9969
On February 10, 2016 at 9:57 AM Nick Olsen <nick at flhsi.com> <nick at flhsi.com> wrote:
Exactly this.
I actually ported my personal cell number to Verizon from ATT yesterday.
Gave the rep my ATT account number, He 30 seconds later asked me for the PIN I set on my ATT account. I provided and my number was working before I hit the door on the way out. Total port time was <5 Min.
I questioned the Rep if this was always the case and he said only if porting from Sprint/ATT/T-Mobile. And that basically any other carrier (Not including MVNO's of the above) took 3-5 Business days. Which is about in-line with my current wireline porting.
I figure they all exchange so many numbers a day it was in all of their best interest to work together.
Not to mention, By automating the process. They don't have to keep an entire call center worth of LNP personnel to handle their volume.
Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106
------------------------------ *From*: "Alexander Lopez" <alex.lopez at opsys.com> <alex.lopez at opsys.com> *Sent*: Tuesday, February 09, 2016 6:00 PM *To*: "Alex Balashov" <abalashov at evaristesys.com> <abalashov at evaristesys.com>, "voiceops at voiceops.org" <voiceops at voiceops.org> <voiceops at voiceops.org> <voiceops at voiceops.org> *Subject*: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
I think the incentive is to cooperate because it is a relatively small group of wireless carriers compared to wireline.
The main reason being that they don't want their ports held up, so they work well with others.
Also since there is a small group they could automate the back office processes between them and submit the request and aknowledgment quickly and without human interaction.
-------- Original message -------- From: Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com> <abalashov at evaristesys.com> Date: 2/9/2016 4:32 PM (GMT-05:00) To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Instant Porting
This does raise, in light of the OP, the question of what economic or political incentive wireless carriers have to cooperate in relatively seamless porting to/from each other.
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States
Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing listVoiceOps at voiceops.orghttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
Mary Lou Carey BackUP Telecom Consulting Marylou at backuptelecom.com Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
participants (14)
-
abalashov＠evaristesys.com -
Adam.Vocks＠cticomputers.com -
alex.lopez＠opsys.com -
avorlando＠yahoo.com -
beckman＠angryox.com -
carlos＠race.com -
colton.conor＠gmail.com -
erik＠eespro.com -
marylou＠backuptelecom.com -
nathana＠fsr.com -
nick＠flhsi.com -
paul＠timmins.net -
peter＠4isps.com -
shawnl＠up.net