|
Home > Archive > Voice over IP Cisco > August 2007 > federal NRO number assignment rules ?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
federal NRO number assignment rules ?
|
|
| Dark Fiber 2007-08-29, 1:11 pm |
| Recently I asked the group about an internal issue I am facing
regarding how we are leveraging DID's and central PRI's.
Basically, we have asked for and recieved a block of DID's that all
fall into one range. Those are all tied to a couple of PRI's that
come into a central location.
We have not only assigned DID's to employees who work out of the
central location, but through the magic of VoIP "ohhh ahhh" we have
users with cisco phones and DID's from the corporate office who work
remotely.
Nothing new here, and nothing I have not seen done every place I have
worked out in the last oh 10 years or so.
However for the first time I am at a company who has some lawyer /
regulatory person on staff who is questioning whether this is legal or
not.
The current statement from this person experiencing concern is,
"compliance with federal NRO number assignment rules".
Sounds awfully legal and well thats what I asked for. I previously
told this person that for the most part everyone I have polled
regarding these concerns have basically agreed in saying its very
common to do this and if it is illegal then show me where and what
makes it illegal? So thats what they replied with, and well I am
googling and trying to make sense of what I read but I can't say I
fully understand it.
Anyone know more about this and understand the implications and how it
affects a business doing what I am doing internally for employee
phones?
| |
| Dark Fiber 2007-08-29, 1:11 pm |
| I agree 911 needs to be addressed, and believe me it is. 911 is not
our issue in this case, steps have been taken to ensure that the
correct address is applied for 911 calls and routed to the correct
PSAP.
The issue and question we are facing is simply in determining whether
its ok to assign a user a DID who is located in a area serviced by a
different NPA-XXX
On 8/29/07, charles george <cisco1.charles@gmail.com> wrote:
> users with cisco phones and DID's from the corporate office who work
> remotely.
>
> Probably has to do with the fact that if someone dials 911 and the DID's
> state that the address for these DID's are at 1 location, the remote users
> will not get help when they call 911 from their Voip phone. Emergency
> Sevices will go to the address for the DID not the location of the Call.
>
> They (Emergency Service) will not know.
>
> Might need enhanced 911 for this to comply.
>
> I may be wrong, but right away Federal and remote and DID's this comes to my
> mind with these combination of words.
>
>
> On 8/29/07, Dark Fiber <d4rkf1ber@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
| |
|
|
|
|
|