I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
I'm sure I know which one you're talking about. It's because they exist in entirely different regulatory domains. The upside of inbound feature group D is that you get to cut out a terrible ILEC tandem, and at least the vendor I'm thinking of doesn't charge for the trunks themselves, so you're at a very strong cost advantage on it. Inbound local trunking, usually interconnection agreements dictate that the trunks have to be dedicated per carrier, so you're just avoiding sinking hardware cost and transport, but it still uses up considerable resources at least in AT&T areas. So if you need 3 trunks to CHCGILWB's tandem, they can't just route that to their trunks where they have existing capacity, like FGD, but they have to install 3 shiny new T1s just for your traffic, that they order as you, to their equipment. It's stupid, convoluted, and wasteful but it's not the vendor's fault, it's AT&T maintaining artificial barriers to competition. As if they'd have it any other way. -Paul On 8/9/19 3:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... ?and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
In our home turf, the same entity is operating local and long distance tandems (I hear it's even the same chassis, just a different blade), so locally, I wouldn't really be avoiding dealing with the ILEC. I understand that may not always be the case. I'd assume it would be fairly common, though, where one ILEC is dominate in the LATA. Ah, so scale doesn't necessarily help them on the local side if I need all of my own trunks anyway. That makes sense. The terms presented to me don't seem to jive well with (my portion of costs of the other gear + profit) * number of trunks required, but that could be a business decision on their side. It totally makes sense that the incumbent and\or government are the source of the problems and not some third party trying to solve problems and provide a service. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Timmins" <paul at timmins.net> To: voiceops at voiceops.org Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:51:41 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I'm sure I know which one you're talking about. It's because they exist in entirely different regulatory domains. The upside of inbound feature group D is that you get to cut out a terrible ILEC tandem, and at least the vendor I'm thinking of doesn't charge for the trunks themselves, so you're at a very strong cost advantage on it. Inbound local trunking, usually interconnection agreements dictate that the trunks have to be dedicated per carrier, so you're just avoiding sinking hardware cost and transport, but it still uses up considerable resources at least in AT&T areas. So if you need 3 trunks to CHCGILWB's tandem, they can't just route that to their trunks where they have existing capacity, like FGD, but they have to install 3 shiny new T1s just for your traffic, that they order as you, to their equipment. It's stupid, convoluted, and wasteful but it's not the vendor's fault, it's AT&T maintaining artificial barriers to competition. As if they'd have it any other way. -Paul On 8/9/19 3:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
There are a couple differences for various reasons. In the LERG there are actually 3 tandems listed: One for Local, One for IntraLATA, and one for FGD traffic. When you interconnect with only the ILEC, they only have you establish 2 trunk groups. A local tandem trunk group that handles the Local and IntraLATA traffic, and an Access Tandem trunk group that handles the transit traffic you and the IXC carriers. When you are connected to the ILEC, all 3 tandem offices in the LERG are listed as the ILECs tandems. If you hire a third party tandem provider for just "access traffic", you're only changing that FGD tandem so the only trunk group you are eliminating with the ILEC is the Access Tandem Trunk group. If you're going to have a third party tandem provider handle your local and IntraLATA traffic as well as your FGD traffic, then the LERG records change significantly. Instead of using your own switch CLLI, you get a POI CLLI for the LATA and populate the third party tandem provider's switch CLLI in the actual switch field of the LERG. This tells everyone that the NXXs belong to your company, but you're leasing another company's switch to handle all the routing. This service eliminates the need for all dedicated trunks between you and the ILEC so you just have trunks between you and the third party tandem. However, there is one more caveat and that is that it depends on what ILEC you are interconnecting with. Verizon will allow the 3rd party tandem provider to add your company's NXXs onto their existing trunk group. CenturyLink and AT&T do not do that. They require the third party tandem providers to install a dedicated trunk group for each company that they are providing switching service for. Because a dedicated trunk group between them and the ILEC costs them more, they will bill you differently in those areas. So the upside to having a third party tandem provider for Local IntraLATA traffic is that you don't have to manage the Local IntraLATA trunks yourself. The downside is that you probably will pay more per minute if you send the traffic through the third party tandem provider. Make sense? MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2019-08-09 02:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
I forgot to mention one more thing......if the third party tandem provider is handling the local and intraLATA traffic for you as well as the FGD traffic, then you don't have to mess with managing your own SS7 network or programming your switch for the PSTN routing. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2019-08-09 03:14 PM, Mary Lou Carey wrote:
There are a couple differences for various reasons. In the LERG there are actually 3 tandems listed: One for Local, One for IntraLATA, and one for FGD traffic. When you interconnect with only the ILEC, they only have you establish 2 trunk groups. A local tandem trunk group that handles the Local and IntraLATA traffic, and an Access Tandem trunk group that handles the transit traffic you and the IXC carriers. When you are connected to the ILEC, all 3 tandem offices in the LERG are listed as the ILECs tandems.
If you hire a third party tandem provider for just "access traffic", you're only changing that FGD tandem so the only trunk group you are eliminating with the ILEC is the Access Tandem Trunk group.
If you're going to have a third party tandem provider handle your local and IntraLATA traffic as well as your FGD traffic, then the LERG records change significantly. Instead of using your own switch CLLI, you get a POI CLLI for the LATA and populate the third party tandem provider's switch CLLI in the actual switch field of the LERG. This tells everyone that the NXXs belong to your company, but you're leasing another company's switch to handle all the routing. This service eliminates the need for all dedicated trunks between you and the ILEC so you just have trunks between you and the third party tandem.
However, there is one more caveat and that is that it depends on what ILEC you are interconnecting with. Verizon will allow the 3rd party tandem provider to add your company's NXXs onto their existing trunk group. CenturyLink and AT&T do not do that. They require the third party tandem providers to install a dedicated trunk group for each company that they are providing switching service for. Because a dedicated trunk group between them and the ILEC costs them more, they will bill you differently in those areas.
So the upside to having a third party tandem provider for Local IntraLATA traffic is that you don't have to manage the Local IntraLATA trunks yourself. The downside is that you probably will pay more per minute if you send the traffic through the third party tandem provider. Make sense?
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2019-08-09 02:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
*nods* I suspect we'll be keeping our own SS7 for a while. We're already in the CO for other reasons and there are more points of failure than a circuit from one room to the other. As you alluded to, if I'm already there, it's hard for them to do it any cheaper than I am. *sigh* The world of telecom... ;-) ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 3:16:22 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I forgot to mention one more thing......if the third party tandem provider is handling the local and intraLATA traffic for you as well as the FGD traffic, then you don't have to mess with managing your own SS7 network or programming your switch for the PSTN routing. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2019-08-09 03:14 PM, Mary Lou Carey wrote:
There are a couple differences for various reasons. In the LERG there are actually 3 tandems listed: One for Local, One for IntraLATA, and one for FGD traffic. When you interconnect with only the ILEC, they only have you establish 2 trunk groups. A local tandem trunk group that handles the Local and IntraLATA traffic, and an Access Tandem trunk group that handles the transit traffic you and the IXC carriers. When you are connected to the ILEC, all 3 tandem offices in the LERG are listed as the ILECs tandems.
If you hire a third party tandem provider for just "access traffic", you're only changing that FGD tandem so the only trunk group you are eliminating with the ILEC is the Access Tandem Trunk group.
If you're going to have a third party tandem provider handle your local and IntraLATA traffic as well as your FGD traffic, then the LERG records change significantly. Instead of using your own switch CLLI, you get a POI CLLI for the LATA and populate the third party tandem provider's switch CLLI in the actual switch field of the LERG. This tells everyone that the NXXs belong to your company, but you're leasing another company's switch to handle all the routing. This service eliminates the need for all dedicated trunks between you and the ILEC so you just have trunks between you and the third party tandem.
However, there is one more caveat and that is that it depends on what ILEC you are interconnecting with. Verizon will allow the 3rd party tandem provider to add your company's NXXs onto their existing trunk group. CenturyLink and AT&T do not do that. They require the third party tandem providers to install a dedicated trunk group for each company that they are providing switching service for. Because a dedicated trunk group between them and the ILEC costs them more, they will bill you differently in those areas.
So the upside to having a third party tandem provider for Local IntraLATA traffic is that you don't have to manage the Local IntraLATA trunks yourself. The downside is that you probably will pay more per minute if you send the traffic through the third party tandem provider. Make sense?
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2019-08-09 02:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
*nods* If I'm not using a third party tandem provider for the local tandem, then I have to build it myself (whether it's actual collocation or just dropping trunks on some transport provider). Since I already did all of that work, why have that third party do the access tandem... since I'm already there anyway. That product just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I do understand that they would have higher costs in some (even many) scenarios, simply by adding me as a customer. The commercial terms for the two types of service were as different as unicorns and lollipops. That's why I assumed things must be critically different... or they just aren't competitive on that product and someone else is. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 3:14:38 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems There are a couple differences for various reasons. In the LERG there are actually 3 tandems listed: One for Local, One for IntraLATA, and one for FGD traffic. When you interconnect with only the ILEC, they only have you establish 2 trunk groups. A local tandem trunk group that handles the Local and IntraLATA traffic, and an Access Tandem trunk group that handles the transit traffic you and the IXC carriers. When you are connected to the ILEC, all 3 tandem offices in the LERG are listed as the ILECs tandems. If you hire a third party tandem provider for just "access traffic", you're only changing that FGD tandem so the only trunk group you are eliminating with the ILEC is the Access Tandem Trunk group. If you're going to have a third party tandem provider handle your local and IntraLATA traffic as well as your FGD traffic, then the LERG records change significantly. Instead of using your own switch CLLI, you get a POI CLLI for the LATA and populate the third party tandem provider's switch CLLI in the actual switch field of the LERG. This tells everyone that the NXXs belong to your company, but you're leasing another company's switch to handle all the routing. This service eliminates the need for all dedicated trunks between you and the ILEC so you just have trunks between you and the third party tandem. However, there is one more caveat and that is that it depends on what ILEC you are interconnecting with. Verizon will allow the 3rd party tandem provider to add your company's NXXs onto their existing trunk group. CenturyLink and AT&T do not do that. They require the third party tandem providers to install a dedicated trunk group for each company that they are providing switching service for. Because a dedicated trunk group between them and the ILEC costs them more, they will bill you differently in those areas. So the upside to having a third party tandem provider for Local IntraLATA traffic is that you don't have to manage the Local IntraLATA trunks yourself. The downside is that you probably will pay more per minute if you send the traffic through the third party tandem provider. Make sense? MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2019-08-09 02:42 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
I wanted to note that I am still interested in working with competitive tandem providers for "on-net" calls... calls among their customers, without ever hitting an ILEC tandem. Also, now that I look at their web page... it says it allows me to receive both local and long distance calls using that service... which seems to conflict with what the sales guy told me. *sigh* ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Inteliquent has several products: Outbound IXC termination - good for sending translated toll free calls. They give you money for sending the calls. LTS - inbound and outbound local/local toll exchange with inteliquent members. Not an A-Z product, but the cheapest way to send calls to tmo/comcast/etc. You get the calls back through this too. IXC terminating inbound - they become the tandem of record in the LERG for your interlata traffic. I think they give you a cut of the tandem transit fee they charge IXCs but it's been a while since I read the contract. AIA - outbound LD product, not A-Z - super competitive rates to on-net carriers and a few others they get a deal on. If someone else uses this, it comes in the IXC terminating inbound and you bill inteliquent's CIC for the inbound inter carrier compensation where applicable. They make their money in not having to pay the tandem transit and other crap that an IXC would ordinarily pay to terminate, but they still pay the terminating carrier's inter carrier comp. Local interconnection service - mostly for interconnected voip. You use their switches too interconnect. Not cheaper than doing it yourself, unless you don't already have a TDM switch and SS7 links and transport. If you lack either of the 3, it can work out financially. -Paul
On Aug 9, 2019, at 5:42 PM, Mike Hammett <voiceops at ics-il.net> wrote:
I wanted to note that I am still interested in working with competitive tandem providers for "on-net" calls... calls among their customers, without ever hitting an ILEC tandem.
Also, now that I look at their web page... it says it allows me to receive both local and long distance calls using that service... which seems to conflict with what the sales guy told me. *sigh*
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com <http://www.ics-il.com/>
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list 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 <https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops>
*nods* it's the transport piece I don't have. Transport to all of these tandems at reasonable prices. I figured since they did have those pieces, it'd be a good alternative. Maybe not. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Timmins" <paul at timmins.net> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2019 1:20:43 AM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems Inteliquent has several products: Outbound IXC termination - good for sending translated toll free calls. They give you money for sending the calls. LTS - inbound and outbound local/local toll exchange with inteliquent members. Not an A-Z product, but the cheapest way to send calls to tmo/comcast/etc. You get the calls back through this too. IXC terminating inbound - they become the tandem of record in the LERG for your interlata traffic. I think they give you a cut of the tandem transit fee they charge IXCs but it's been a while since I read the contract. AIA - outbound LD product, not A-Z - super competitive rates to on-net carriers and a few others they get a deal on. If someone else uses this, it comes in the IXC terminating inbound and you bill inteliquent's CIC for the inbound inter carrier compensation where applicable. They make their money in not having to pay the tandem transit and other crap that an IXC would ordinarily pay to terminate, but they still pay the terminating carrier's inter carrier comp. Local interconnection service - mostly for interconnected voip. You use their switches too interconnect. Not cheaper than doing it yourself, unless you don't already have a TDM switch and SS7 links and transport. If you lack either of the 3, it can work out financially. -Paul On Aug 9, 2019, at 5:42 PM, Mike Hammett < voiceops at ics-il.net > wrote: I wanted to note that I am still interested in working with competitive tandem providers for "on-net" calls... calls among their customers, without ever hitting an ILEC tandem. Also, now that I look at their web page... it says it allows me to receive both local and long distance calls using that service... which seems to conflict with what the sales guy told me. *sigh* ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" < voiceops at ics-il.net > To: "VoiceOps" < voiceops at voiceops.org > Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
It is a good alternative if you don't offer DSL, TLS, UNEs, etc but it's more cost effective to do it as an Interconnected VOIP carrier than as a CLEC if you go that route. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2019-08-16 10:44 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
*nods* it's the transport piece I don't have. Transport to all of these tandems at reasonable prices. I figured since they did have those pieces, it'd be a good alternative. Maybe not.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
FROM: "Paul Timmins" <paul at timmins.net> TO: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> CC: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> SENT: Saturday, August 10, 2019 1:20:43 AM SUBJECT: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
Inteliquent has several products:
Outbound IXC termination - good for sending translated toll free calls. They give you money for sending the calls. LTS - inbound and outbound local/local toll exchange with inteliquent members. Not an A-Z product, but the cheapest way to send calls to tmo/comcast/etc. You get the calls back through this too. IXC terminating inbound - they become the tandem of record in the LERG for your interlata traffic. I think they give you a cut of the tandem transit fee they charge IXCs but it's been a while since I read the contract. AIA - outbound LD product, not A-Z - super competitive rates to on-net carriers and a few others they get a deal on. If someone else uses this, it comes in the IXC terminating inbound and you bill inteliquent's CIC for the inbound inter carrier compensation where applicable. They make their money in not having to pay the tandem transit and other crap that an IXC would ordinarily pay to terminate, but they still pay the terminating carrier's inter carrier comp.
Local interconnection service - mostly for interconnected voip. You use their switches too interconnect. Not cheaper than doing it yourself, unless you don't already have a TDM switch and SS7 links and transport. If you lack either of the 3, it can work out financially.
-Paul
On Aug 9, 2019, at 5:42 PM, Mike Hammett <voiceops at ics-il.net> wrote:
I wanted to note that I am still interested in working with competitive tandem providers for "on-net" calls... calls among their customers, without ever hitting an ILEC tandem.
Also, now that I look at their web page... it says it allows me to receive both local and long distance calls using that service... which seems to conflict with what the sales guy told me. *sigh*
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [1]
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com [2]
-------------------------
FROM: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> TO: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> SENT: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM SUBJECT: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
Links: ------ [1] http://www.ics-il.com/ [2] http://www.midwest-ix.com/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
I did want to circle back on this. I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be easier for my expansions. So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers and products, even off-list solicitations. I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for a single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks. I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs compared to the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate in. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
Due to receiving several offlist e-mails about this point, I wanted to point out that I'm not looking to do SIP directly to an ILEC tandem. I assume there would be some abstraction layer happening by a third party. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:24:57 AM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I did want to circle back on this. I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be easier for my expansions. So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers and products, even off-list solicitations. I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for a single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks. I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs compared to the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate in. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
You can get a PSTN Connection Service from Peerless or Wide Voice. Inteliquent used to offer that service but they have backed away from it recently. To make it simple, you have to get certified as an Interconnected VOIP carrier and then set up SIP trunks with your PSTN Connection provider. You order a POI CLLI and LRN NXX for every LATA that you want to enter and point your traffic to the PSTN Connection provider's switch in the LERG. You still have all your own NXXs and LRNs, but you can get rid of your SS7 network because the PSTN Connection Service Provider handles that piece. You still do all your own porting and maintain all your connections with 911, LD, VOIP providers. If you want more information on how it all works, just message me privately. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-02-08 03:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Due to receiving several offlist e-mails about this point, I wanted to point out that I'm not looking to do SIP directly to an ILEC tandem. I assume there would be some abstraction layer happening by a third party.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:24:57 AM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I did want to circle back on this.
I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be easier for my expansions.
So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers and products, even off-list solicitations.
I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for a single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks.
I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs compared to the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate in.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
That's the first I've heard of Wide Voice. Their network looks little sparse at the moment. I wonder if it's on-demand, as in once you inquire about a LATA, they build it out. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:33:19 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems You can get a PSTN Connection Service from Peerless or Wide Voice. Inteliquent used to offer that service but they have backed away from it recently. To make it simple, you have to get certified as an Interconnected VOIP carrier and then set up SIP trunks with your PSTN Connection provider. You order a POI CLLI and LRN NXX for every LATA that you want to enter and point your traffic to the PSTN Connection provider's switch in the LERG. You still have all your own NXXs and LRNs, but you can get rid of your SS7 network because the PSTN Connection Service Provider handles that piece. You still do all your own porting and maintain all your connections with 911, LD, VOIP providers. If you want more information on how it all works, just message me privately. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-02-08 03:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Due to receiving several offlist e-mails about this point, I wanted to point out that I'm not looking to do SIP directly to an ILEC tandem. I assume there would be some abstraction layer happening by a third party.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:24:57 AM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I did want to circle back on this.
I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be easier for my expansions.
So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers and products, even off-list solicitations.
I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for a single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks.
I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs compared to the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate in.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
Wide Voice used to run the PSTN connectivity (they may still do it, I haven't investigated) for FreeConferenceCall.com and other similar services. They probably had to change up the business model when intercarrier compensation rates dried up. On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 3:55 PM Mike Hammett <voiceops at ics-il.net> wrote:
That's the first I've heard of Wide Voice. Their network looks little sparse at the moment. I wonder if it's on-demand, as in once you inquire about a LATA, they build it out.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
------------------------------ *From: *"Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> *Cc: *"VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> *Sent: *Monday, February 8, 2021 5:33:19 PM *Subject: *Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
You can get a PSTN Connection Service from Peerless or Wide Voice. Inteliquent used to offer that service but they have backed away from it recently.
To make it simple, you have to get certified as an Interconnected VOIP carrier and then set up SIP trunks with your PSTN Connection provider. You order a POI CLLI and LRN NXX for every LATA that you want to enter and point your traffic to the PSTN Connection provider's switch in the LERG. You still have all your own NXXs and LRNs, but you can get rid of your SS7 network because the PSTN Connection Service Provider handles that piece. You still do all your own porting and maintain all your connections with 911, LD, VOIP providers. If you want more information on how it all works, just message me privately.
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2021-02-08 03:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Due to receiving several offlist e-mails about this point, I wanted to point out that I'm not looking to do SIP directly to an ILEC tandem. I assume there would be some abstraction layer happening by a third party.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:24:57 AM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I did want to circle back on this.
I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be easier for my expansions.
So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers and products, even off-list solicitations.
I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for a single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks.
I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs compared to the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate in.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
They still do it....I just helped a client connect with them recently. All the PSTN Connection providers prefer that CLECs get certified as IPES providers though because AT&T and Lumen (fka CenturyLink) will only allow the PSTN connection providers to add IPES NXXs to their existing trunks. AT&T and Lumen make the PSTN connection providers install separate trunk groups for CLEC NXXs. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-02-09 12:43 PM, Jared Geiger wrote:
Wide Voice used to run the PSTN connectivity (they may still do it, I haven't investigated) for FreeConferenceCall.com and other similar services. They probably had to change up the business model when intercarrier compensation rates dried up.
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 3:55 PM Mike Hammett <voiceops at ics-il.net> wrote:
That's the first I've heard of Wide Voice. Their network looks little sparse at the moment. I wonder if it's on-demand, as in once you inquire about a LATA, they build it out.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:33:19 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
You can get a PSTN Connection Service from Peerless or Wide Voice. Inteliquent used to offer that service but they have backed away from it recently.
To make it simple, you have to get certified as an Interconnected VOIP carrier and then set up SIP trunks with your PSTN Connection provider. You order a POI CLLI and LRN NXX for every LATA that you want to enter and point your traffic to the PSTN Connection provider's switch in the LERG. You still have all your own NXXs and LRNs, but you can get rid of your SS7 network because the PSTN Connection Service Provider handles that piece. You still do all your own porting and maintain all your connections with 911, LD, VOIP providers. If you want more information on how it all works, just message me privately.
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2021-02-08 03:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Due to receiving several offlist e-mails about this point, I wanted to point out that I'm not looking to do SIP directly to an ILEC tandem. I assume there would be some abstraction layer happening by a third party.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:24:57 AM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I did want to circle back on this.
I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be easier for my expansions.
So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers and products, even off-list solicitations.
I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for a single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks.
I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs compared to the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate in.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
_______________________________________________ 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, To make sure I understand: the PSTN connection providers have to build separate tandem trunk groups in each respective LATA for CLEC NXXs vs IPES NXXs? ? Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.
On Feb 10, 2021, at 2:10 PM, Mary Lou Carey <marylou at backuptelecom.com> wrote:
?They still do it....I just helped a client connect with them recently. All the PSTN Connection providers prefer that CLECs get certified as IPES providers though because AT&T and Lumen (fka CenturyLink) will only allow the PSTN connection providers to add IPES NXXs to their existing trunks. AT&T and Lumen make the PSTN connection providers install separate trunk groups for CLEC NXXs.
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2021-02-09 12:43 PM, Jared Geiger wrote: Wide Voice used to run the PSTN connectivity (they may still do it, I haven't investigated) for FreeConferenceCall.com and other similar services. They probably had to change up the business model when intercarrier compensation rates dried up.
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 3:55 PM Mike Hammett <voiceops at ics-il.net> wrote: That's the first I've heard of Wide Voice. Their network looks little sparse at the moment. I wonder if it's on-demand, as in once you inquire about a LATA, they build it out. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:33:19 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems You can get a PSTN Connection Service from Peerless or Wide Voice. Inteliquent used to offer that service but they have backed away from it recently. To make it simple, you have to get certified as an Interconnected VOIP carrier and then set up SIP trunks with your PSTN Connection provider. You order a POI CLLI and LRN NXX for every LATA that you want to enter and point your traffic to the PSTN Connection provider's switch in the LERG. You still have all your own NXXs and LRNs, but you can get rid of your SS7 network because the PSTN Connection Service Provider handles that piece. You still do all your own porting and maintain all your connections with 911, LD, VOIP providers. If you want more information on how it all works, just message me privately. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-02-08 03:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Due to receiving several offlist e-mails about this point, I wanted to point out that I'm not looking to do SIP directly to an ILEC tandem. I assume there would be some abstraction layer happening by a third party. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:24:57 AM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I did want to circle back on this. I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be easier for my expansions. So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers and products, even off-list solicitations. I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for a single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks. I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs compared to the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate in. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
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
Verizon will allow PSTN Connection Providers to put both IPES and CLEC NXXs on their existing trunk groups. AT&T and Lumen only allow PSTN Connection Providers to put IPES NXXs on their existing trunks. You are correct that for CLECs, AT&T and Lumen require the PSTN Connection Providers to build separate trunk groups in each LATA the CLEC operates in. That's why it's becoming more beneficial to become an IPES provider. The other benefit is that CLECs have to be certified in every state and order an OCN for each state. IPES providers get certified for the entire country at one time and only have one OCN to identify their NXXs across the entire country. When IPES providers file NRUF reports, they only have to submit 1 NRUF report for their OCN vs CLECs who have to submit one NRUF report for every OCN they have. Becoming an IPES provider also eliminates the need for SS7 links and SS7 routes! You usually pay a per-port charge for the connection to the PSTN Connection provider and a per-minute charge fee for all the traffic (as opposed to getting local traffic for free), but you don't have the cost of the SS7 network or SS7 routes. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-02-10 01:13 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
Mary Lou,
To make sure I understand: the PSTN connection providers have to build separate tandem trunk groups in each respective LATA for CLEC NXXs vs IPES NXXs?
? Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.
On Feb 10, 2021, at 2:10 PM, Mary Lou Carey <marylou at backuptelecom.com> wrote:
?They still do it....I just helped a client connect with them recently. All the PSTN Connection providers prefer that CLECs get certified as IPES providers though because AT&T and Lumen (fka CenturyLink) will only allow the PSTN connection providers to add IPES NXXs to their existing trunks. AT&T and Lumen make the PSTN connection providers install separate trunk groups for CLEC NXXs.
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2021-02-09 12:43 PM, Jared Geiger wrote: Wide Voice used to run the PSTN connectivity (they may still do it, I haven't investigated) for FreeConferenceCall.com and other similar services. They probably had to change up the business model when intercarrier compensation rates dried up.
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 3:55 PM Mike Hammett <voiceops at ics-il.net> wrote: That's the first I've heard of Wide Voice. Their network looks little sparse at the moment. I wonder if it's on-demand, as in once you inquire about a LATA, they build it out. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:33:19 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems You can get a PSTN Connection Service from Peerless or Wide Voice. Inteliquent used to offer that service but they have backed away from it recently. To make it simple, you have to get certified as an Interconnected VOIP carrier and then set up SIP trunks with your PSTN Connection provider. You order a POI CLLI and LRN NXX for every LATA that you want to enter and point your traffic to the PSTN Connection provider's switch in the LERG. You still have all your own NXXs and LRNs, but you can get rid of your SS7 network because the PSTN Connection Service Provider handles that piece. You still do all your own porting and maintain all your connections with 911, LD, VOIP providers. If you want more information on how it all works, just message me privately. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-02-08 03:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Due to receiving several offlist e-mails about this point, I wanted to point out that I'm not looking to do SIP directly to an ILEC tandem. I assume there would be some abstraction layer happening by a third party. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:24:57 AM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I did want to circle back on this. I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be easier for my expansions. So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers and products, even off-list solicitations. I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for a single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks. I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs compared to the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate in. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
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
VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
That does indeed sound infinitely more economical and bureaucratically attainable. Why would anyone who provides primarily or exclusively IP telecom services want to be a CLEC anymore, unless specialising in regional wholesale PSTN connectivity, needing rights-of-way to build own network, or something of that ilk? -- Alex On 2/10/21 2:26 PM, Mary Lou Carey wrote:
Verizon will allow PSTN Connection Providers to put both IPES and CLEC NXXs on their existing trunk groups. AT&T and Lumen only allow PSTN Connection Providers to put IPES NXXs on their existing trunks. You are correct that for CLECs, AT&T and Lumen require the PSTN Connection Providers to build separate trunk groups in each LATA the CLEC operates in.
That's why it's becoming more beneficial to become an IPES provider. The other benefit is that CLECs have to be certified in every state and order an OCN for each state. IPES providers get certified for the entire country at one time and only have one OCN to identify their NXXs across the entire country. When IPES providers file NRUF reports, they only have to submit 1 NRUF report for their OCN vs CLECs who have to submit one NRUF report for every OCN they have.
Becoming an IPES provider also eliminates the need for SS7 links and SS7 routes! You usually pay a per-port charge for the connection to the PSTN Connection provider and a per-minute charge fee for all the traffic (as opposed to getting local traffic for free), but you don't have the cost of the SS7 network or SS7 routes.
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2021-02-10 01:13 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
Mary Lou,
To make sure I understand: the PSTN connection providers have to build separate tandem trunk groups in each respective LATA for CLEC NXXs vs IPES NXXs?
? Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.
On Feb 10, 2021, at 2:10 PM, Mary Lou Carey <marylou at backuptelecom.com> wrote:
?They still do it....I just helped a client connect with them recently. All the PSTN Connection providers prefer that CLECs get certified as IPES providers though because AT&T and Lumen (fka CenturyLink) will only allow the PSTN connection providers to add IPES NXXs to their existing trunks. AT&T and Lumen make the PSTN connection providers install separate trunk groups for CLEC NXXs.
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2021-02-09 12:43 PM, Jared Geiger wrote: Wide Voice used to run the PSTN connectivity (they may still do it, I haven't investigated) for FreeConferenceCall.com and other similar services. They probably had to change up the business model when intercarrier compensation rates dried up.
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 3:55 PM Mike Hammett <voiceops at ics-il.net> wrote: That's the first I've heard of Wide Voice. Their network looks little sparse at the moment. I wonder if it's on-demand, as in once you inquire about a LATA, they build it out. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:33:19 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems You can get a PSTN Connection Service from Peerless or Wide Voice. Inteliquent used to offer that service but they have backed away from it recently. To make it simple, you have to get certified as an Interconnected VOIP carrier and then set up SIP trunks with your PSTN Connection provider. You order a POI CLLI and LRN NXX for every LATA that you want to enter and point your traffic to the PSTN Connection provider's switch in the LERG. You still have all your own NXXs and LRNs, but you can get rid of your SS7 network because the PSTN Connection Service Provider handles that piece. You still do all your own porting and maintain all your connections with 911, LD, VOIP providers. If you want more information on how it all works, just message me privately. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-02-08 03:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Due to receiving several offlist e-mails about this point, I wanted to point out that I'm not looking to do SIP directly to an ILEC tandem. I assume there would be some abstraction layer happening by a third party. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:24:57 AM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I did want to circle back on this. I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be easier for my expansions. So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers and products, even off-list solicitations. I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for a single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks. I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs compared to the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate in. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections...? and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
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
VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/
Very true...unless CLECs still order UNE loops or resale services from the ILEC there's not a whole lot of incentive to become a CLEC! MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-02-10 01:48 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
That does indeed sound infinitely more economical and bureaucratically attainable. Why would anyone who provides primarily or exclusively IP telecom services want to be a CLEC anymore, unless specialising in regional wholesale PSTN connectivity, needing rights-of-way to build own network, or something of that ilk?
-- Alex
On 2/10/21 2:26 PM, Mary Lou Carey wrote:
Verizon will allow PSTN Connection Providers to put both IPES and CLEC NXXs on their existing trunk groups. AT&T and Lumen only allow PSTN Connection Providers to put IPES NXXs on their existing trunks. You are correct that for CLECs, AT&T and Lumen require the PSTN Connection Providers to build separate trunk groups in each LATA the CLEC operates in.
That's why it's becoming more beneficial to become an IPES provider. The other benefit is that CLECs have to be certified in every state and order an OCN for each state. IPES providers get certified for the entire country at one time and only have one OCN to identify their NXXs across the entire country. When IPES providers file NRUF reports, they only have to submit 1 NRUF report for their OCN vs CLECs who have to submit one NRUF report for every OCN they have.
Becoming an IPES provider also eliminates the need for SS7 links and SS7 routes! You usually pay a per-port charge for the connection to the PSTN Connection provider and a per-minute charge fee for all the traffic (as opposed to getting local traffic for free), but you don't have the cost of the SS7 network or SS7 routes.
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2021-02-10 01:13 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
Mary Lou,
To make sure I understand: the PSTN connection providers have to build separate tandem trunk groups in each respective LATA for CLEC NXXs vs IPES NXXs?
? Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.
On Feb 10, 2021, at 2:10 PM, Mary Lou Carey <marylou at backuptelecom.com> wrote:
?They still do it....I just helped a client connect with them recently. All the PSTN Connection providers prefer that CLECs get certified as IPES providers though because AT&T and Lumen (fka CenturyLink) will only allow the PSTN connection providers to add IPES NXXs to their existing trunks. AT&T and Lumen make the PSTN connection providers install separate trunk groups for CLEC NXXs.
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2021-02-09 12:43 PM, Jared Geiger wrote: Wide Voice used to run the PSTN connectivity (they may still do it, I haven't investigated) for FreeConferenceCall.com and other similar services. They probably had to change up the business model when intercarrier compensation rates dried up.
On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 3:55 PM Mike Hammett <voiceops at ics-il.net> wrote: That's the first I've heard of Wide Voice. Their network looks little sparse at the moment. I wonder if it's on-demand, as in once you inquire about a LATA, they build it out. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ------------------------- From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 5:33:19 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems You can get a PSTN Connection Service from Peerless or Wide Voice. Inteliquent used to offer that service but they have backed away from it recently. To make it simple, you have to get certified as an Interconnected VOIP carrier and then set up SIP trunks with your PSTN Connection provider. You order a POI CLLI and LRN NXX for every LATA that you want to enter and point your traffic to the PSTN Connection provider's switch in the LERG. You still have all your own NXXs and LRNs, but you can get rid of your SS7 network because the PSTN Connection Service Provider handles that piece. You still do all your own porting and maintain all your connections with 911, LD, VOIP providers. If you want more information on how it all works, just message me privately. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-02-08 03:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: > Due to receiving several offlist e-mails about this point, I wanted to > point out that I'm not looking to do SIP directly to an ILEC tandem. I > assume there would be some abstraction layer happening by a third > party. > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > Midwest Internet Exchange > http://www.midwest-ix.com > ------------------------- > From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> > To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> > Sent: Monday, February 8, 2021 9:24:57 AM > Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems > I did want to circle back on this. > I am currently a CLEC with traditional voice services in a single LATA > on a single set of tandems. We have SS7, do our own porting, etc. > I understand that going interconnected VoIP (instead of CLEC) may be > easier for my expansions. > So that I don't have to drag T1s all over the place, what options do I > have in front of me? To be clear, I am looking for specific providers > and products, even off-list solicitations. > I'm not afraid of T1s, they're just expensive. I got a quote for > a > single T1 to the facility where the other tandem in our LATA is, and > it was far more expensive than just sending the calls out our > termination providers. If I need more than one T1 (one for each > tandem), then I'm really priced out of the market. Obviously that > course of action wouldn't help me for my own number blocks. > I looked at straight DID\minute services, but as some of our past (and > potential future) customers have several hundreds of DIDs > compared to > the amount of traffic they'd have, that gets a difficult to operate > in. > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > Midwest Internet Exchange > http://www.midwest-ix.com > ------------------------- > From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> > To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> > Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM > Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems > I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left > out company names. > One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in > getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, > they would, but the terms were vastly different. > Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, > what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? > Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because > the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could > potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, > once > volume dictated I needed direct connections...? and they don't want to > deal with that? > Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms > for > local tandem services? > Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? > I > went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was > saying, but I could be wrong. > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > Midwest Internet Exchange > http://www.midwest-ix.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 _______________________________________________ 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
VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
At the suggestion of this mailing list, I started pursuing the IVP/IPES route instead of trying to do my expansions via CLEC authority. I've had conversations with a few companies to enable the IPES services, Verizon, Inteliquent, Intrado (West), and Peerless. I haven't talked to Wide Voice because their stated coverage is inadequate. I haven't talked to Level 3 because they never answered me. * One of the conversations went nowhere because while they knew what I was talking about, they didn't think they had a product for that. Their rates for adjacent services were actually reasonable. * One had it productized, but had a 5 figure minimum monthly commit. The stated reason was that the LECs are a pain and they wanted to make sure they had a decent return before they committed resources. * One had only part of the solution, still requiring me to build out the tandems myself for the ILEC interconnection. * One had it productized and had no monthly minimum. Okay, so four very different responses from four companies. The one seems like the a slam dunk, but being a slam drunk in the face of such difficulty, I become skeptical. We're coming from a TDM, voice CLEC background, not a retail SIP provider background. Is there something I'm underestimating in this process? ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
The service you are looking for is called PSTN Connection service, but you need to have either an FCC IPES certification (Direct Access to Numbering Resources) or a CLEC license. I have contacts at Inteliquent, Peerless, and Wide Voice if you need them. PSTN connection service is turned up on a per LATA basis so you don't have to limit yourself to one carrier for the entire country unless you want to. Its my understanding Wide Voice covers more areas for IPES providers than they do for CLEC. Peerless and Wide Voice will work with anyone.....Inteliquent used to be willing to work with anyone but in the last year they've been less interested in serving IPES companies that don't have a significant amount of traffic to start out with. That could have changed since they were just bought out, but that's been my experience while helping carriers turn up their networks over the last year. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-07-07 08:12 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
At the suggestion of this mailing list, I started pursuing the IVP/IPES route instead of trying to do my expansions via CLEC authority.
I've had conversations with a few companies to enable the IPES services, Verizon, Inteliquent, Intrado (West), and Peerless. I haven't talked to Wide Voice because their stated coverage is inadequate. I haven't talked to Level 3 because they never answered me.
* One of the conversations went nowhere because while they knew what I was talking about, they didn't think they had a product for that. Their rates for adjacent services were actually reasonable. * One had it productized, but had a 5 figure minimum monthly commit. The stated reason was that the LECs are a pain and they wanted to make sure they had a decent return before they committed resources. * One had only part of the solution, still requiring me to build out the tandems myself for the ILEC interconnection. * One had it productized and had no monthly minimum.
Okay, so four very different responses from four companies. The one seems like the a slam dunk, but being a slam drunk in the face of such difficulty, I become skeptical. We're coming from a TDM, voice CLEC background, not a retail SIP provider background. Is there something I'm underestimating in this process?
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
*nods* I have been talking to people at Inteliquent and Peerless about their PSTN Connect services. My recent conversations reflect your observations. I didn't bother with Wide Voice because their coverage seemed to be minuscule (didn't even have coverage in Chicago). If you think their website's stated coverage isn't accurate, I'd appreciate an introduction. Do you think the vast difference in approaches (and thus requirements) taken by Inteliquent vs. Peerless or Wide Voice are simply business interest vs. something fundamental that I'm missing? I'm trying to be somewhat vague in my statements and questions, erring on the side of caution regarding whatever NDAs I may have signed and speaking in a public venue. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2021 2:12:04 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems The service you are looking for is called PSTN Connection service, but you need to have either an FCC IPES certification (Direct Access to Numbering Resources) or a CLEC license. I have contacts at Inteliquent, Peerless, and Wide Voice if you need them. PSTN connection service is turned up on a per LATA basis so you don't have to limit yourself to one carrier for the entire country unless you want to. Its my understanding Wide Voice covers more areas for IPES providers than they do for CLEC. Peerless and Wide Voice will work with anyone.....Inteliquent used to be willing to work with anyone but in the last year they've been less interested in serving IPES companies that don't have a significant amount of traffic to start out with. That could have changed since they were just bought out, but that's been my experience while helping carriers turn up their networks over the last year. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-07-07 08:12 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
At the suggestion of this mailing list, I started pursuing the IVP/IPES route instead of trying to do my expansions via CLEC authority.
I've had conversations with a few companies to enable the IPES services, Verizon, Inteliquent, Intrado (West), and Peerless. I haven't talked to Wide Voice because their stated coverage is inadequate. I haven't talked to Level 3 because they never answered me.
* One of the conversations went nowhere because while they knew what I was talking about, they didn't think they had a product for that. Their rates for adjacent services were actually reasonable. * One had it productized, but had a 5 figure minimum monthly commit. The stated reason was that the LECs are a pain and they wanted to make sure they had a decent return before they committed resources. * One had only part of the solution, still requiring me to build out the tandems myself for the ILEC interconnection. * One had it productized and had no monthly minimum.
Okay, so four very different responses from four companies. The one seems like the a slam dunk, but being a slam drunk in the face of such difficulty, I become skeptical. We're coming from a TDM, voice CLEC background, not a retail SIP provider background. Is there something I'm underestimating in this process?
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
I'm sure a lot of it has to do with more than is visible to us. I will message you privately so we can discuss options further. MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111 On 2021-07-09 08:19 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
*nods*
I have been talking to people at Inteliquent and Peerless about their PSTN Connect services. My recent conversations reflect your observations.
I didn't bother with Wide Voice because their coverage seemed to be minuscule (didn't even have coverage in Chicago). If you think their website's stated coverage isn't accurate, I'd appreciate an introduction.
Do you think the vast difference in approaches (and thus requirements) taken by Inteliquent vs. Peerless or Wide Voice are simply business interest vs. something fundamental that I'm missing?
I'm trying to be somewhat vague in my statements and questions, erring on the side of caution regarding whatever NDAs I may have signed and speaking in a public venue.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mary Lou Carey" <marylou at backuptelecom.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> Cc: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2021 2:12:04 PM Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
The service you are looking for is called PSTN Connection service, but
you need to have either an FCC IPES certification (Direct Access to Numbering Resources) or a CLEC license. I have contacts at Inteliquent, Peerless, and Wide Voice if you need them. PSTN connection service is turned up on a per LATA basis so you don't have to limit yourself to one carrier for the entire country unless you want to. Its my understanding Wide Voice covers more areas for IPES providers than they do for CLEC.
Peerless and Wide Voice will work with anyone.....Inteliquent used to be willing to work with anyone but in the last year they've been less interested in serving IPES companies that don't have a significant amount of traffic to start out with. That could have changed since they were just bought out, but that's been my experience while helping carriers turn up their networks over the last year.
MARY LOU CAREY BackUP Telecom Consulting Office: 615-791-9969 Cell: 615-796-1111
On 2021-07-07 08:12 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
At the suggestion of this mailing list, I started pursuing the IVP/IPES route instead of trying to do my expansions via CLEC authority.
I've had conversations with a few companies to enable the IPES services, Verizon, Inteliquent, Intrado (West), and Peerless. I haven't talked to Wide Voice because their stated coverage is inadequate. I haven't talked to Level 3 because they never answered me.
* One of the conversations went nowhere because while they knew what I was talking about, they didn't think they had a product for that. Their rates for adjacent services were actually reasonable. * One had it productized, but had a 5 figure minimum monthly commit. The stated reason was that the LECs are a pain and they wanted to make sure they had a decent return before they committed resources. * One had only part of the solution, still requiring me to build out the tandems myself for the ILEC interconnection. * One had it productized and had no monthly minimum.
Okay, so four very different responses from four companies. The one seems like the a slam dunk, but being a slam drunk in the face of such difficulty, I become skeptical. We're coming from a TDM, voice CLEC background, not a retail SIP provider background. Is there something I'm underestimating in this process?
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com
-------------------------
From: "Mike Hammett" <voiceops at ics-il.net> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:42:37 PM Subject: [VoiceOps] Connecting to Remote Tandems
I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names.
One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different.
Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance?
Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that?
Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services?
Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.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
participants (5)
-
abalashov＠evaristesys.com -
jared＠compuwizz.net -
marylou＠backuptelecom.com -
paul＠timmins.net -
voiceops＠ics-il.net