Number portability and the demise of line number pools in bankruptcy [telecom]

You seem to be confusing porting with call forwarding. Once a number is ported, calls don't go anywhere near the old "donor" network. When you make a call, your switch (or for a long distance call, your long distance carrier) queries the ported number database to find out what switch handle the number, and the call goes directly to that switch. Each ported number database is run by a neutral third party, typically Neustar.

I don't know offhand of any cases of a dead provider's numbers being reclaimed, but even if they are, reissuing them should be no problem. The new provider can't use the live numbers that have been ported away, but the database should make it easy enough for them to avoid that.

RFC 3842 provides a good overview of the way that portability works.

Also see Neustar's page where they describe their NPAC service:

R's, John

John, please correctly attribute quotes of my remarks to me. If I was sloppy in phrasing my question, then the error is on me and shouldn't be assumed to be on anyone else.

I was not.

I assumed that a call would be routed to the default network and, if the number was ported, the database of ported numbers would be consulted for routing instructions.

What happens to telephone numbers ported out of a pool when the pool is eliminated due to the demise of the telephone company authorized to assign numbers from it? I theorized that the incumbent local exchange carrier might be temporarily assigned as the default network for the pool (until the pool is reassigned to another phone company that's run out of numbers), doing nothing more than referring queries to those remaining numbers ported out of the pool to the ported number database, but I assumed that the ILEC had no such obligation in the regulatory scheme. No, I should not have said "switch".

John kindly explained that we use an All Call Query scheme, in which case the ported number database is queried to learn if the number is indeed ported, instead of a Query on Release scheme, in which case the ported number database is queried only if the number was ported out of the default network's pool. In ACQ, I can see how routing instructions to numbers ported out of a pool that no longer exists could survive the demise of the pool.

+--------------- | RFC 3842 provides a good overview of the way that portability works. +---------------

RFC 3842 is "A Message Summary and Message Waiting Indication Event Package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)".

I think you meant RFC 3482, "Number Portability in the Global Switched Telephone Network (GSTN): An Overview".

-Rob

+--------------------------------------------------------------+ Rob Warnock 627 26th Avenue San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607

Assumption is incorrect.

Originating switch does a database dip to find appropriate destination switch, and routes directly to that destination switch.

This is desirable/necessary because the 'native' switch, and 'ported number destination switch' may require -different- inter-carrier routing to get to the destination.

Case in point, if call origin is on the same network as the ported destination, and where ported destination is _not_ the same as the 'native' network, does it make sense for origination network to hand call off to 'native' network only to have that network hand it back for final delivery? And *how* do you do the 'settlement' for that call? Does the 'native network' get something for a 'zero miles' hand-off?

The 'native' LEC, defunct or otherwise, has -nothing- to do with the routing of calls to 'ported away' numbers. an independent third party maintains the consolidated database.

One can either query before every call, or attempt a call set-up to the 'native' network, and if that set-up fails (for pretty much any reason other than 'circuit in use'), do the (third-party maintained) master database dip, and re-try. Note: if the 'native' network has gone defunct, the above logic _will_ work because the required info is still in the 3rd-party maintained database.

The 'critical' element in making this stuff work, regardless of how it is done, is having the "ported number database" operated and maintained by a third party, with the _funding_ for that operation/maintenance coming from _all_ the 'interested parties' -- so that loss of revenue from _some_ network operator does -not- result in the 'loss' of the information about numbers that 'used to' belong to that operator.

In non-technical terms it is my understanding that I still "own" my ported number if it is ported from a wireline or wireless carrier to a different wireline or wireless carrier. My duty is to not disconnect the former service until the new service is established and my porting request has been completed.

But, with Vonage (which I have) I understand any number I port to them is probably lost should I choose to discontinue my Vonage account. I am speaking of a directly number I ported from my former wireline or wireless carrier, not a number Vonage assigned to me.

Can anyone clarify or explain it better?

The FCC laid it out quite clearly in 1996. They did not want calls to ported numbers to depend in any way on cooperation from the target number's former switch. That would give the ILECs a huge incentive to screw it up, since they would almost always be the former switch.

That's actually not the problem. LECs do local transit for other reasons, and they do some sort of settlements.

Right. That would be Neustar.

R's, John

That's not unique to Vonage. If you cancel your service without porting your number away first, the number is available and is returned to the original carrier.

By the way, has anyone else managed to port a number away from Vonage? I did it, but they didn't make it easy.

Regards, John Levine, snipped-for-privacy@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail.

***** Moderator's Note *****

John, did you have to order Neustar to force the change, or did Vonage give up before then?

Bill Horne Moderator

That was back in the chaotic era when you couldn't even get them on the phone, so I ported it to another VoIP provider which completed before they noticed. Then I changed my credit card number, which made it easier to get their attention and cancel my account. ("Sir, we will have to cancel your account if you don't pay." "Cancel the account, I've been telling you that for months." "Uh, er, I'll have to call you back.") Much later I simultaneously started getting notices from a collection agency due to Vonage trying to collect for months after I cancelled, along with junk mail in which Vonage told me how much they wanted me back.

About a year after I cancelled, I started getting some odd calls from an old guy whose daughter was in college near here, and realized that chaos still reigned: they had attempted to reassign my number to the daughter. What this meant was that my number showed up on the caller-id when she called home, any non-Vonage customer who tried to call her got me, and any Vonage customer who tried to call me got her.

Fortunately, at that time I realized I knew one of the guys on their board of directors, sent him an e-mail, and a couple of days later got a call from a very nervous flack assuring me at great length that everything was fixed and they wouldn't be bothering me any more. That would have been fine except that I was in England that week with my number forwarded to my cell phone, so it was costing me about $1 per minute to listen to him. And I haven't heard from them since. If I hadn't had the connection to the board member, who knows whether I'd ever have been able to get the girl's number changed.

So anyway, if anyone was asking, no, I would not recommend Vonage for your telephone service.

R's, John

My assumption was that the originating network would query the default destination network for routing instructions, and if informed by the default destination network that the number has been ported out of its pool, then the originating network would query the ported number database for routing instructions.

Same as they settle up for any database dips.

That seems like a truly bad idea. Under a Query on Release scheme, the referral to the ported number database should take place for ported numbers, only, and not for any other reason, especially not for "number not in use".

Yes, the information exists, but if every switch in the world has been informed that the pool of numbers no longer exists, then no attempts should be made to route calls into that pool. If QoR were in effect, you'd have to assign the entire pool to the network on which the ported number database lived, which seems wasteful when you might have a mere handful of numbers living on due to number porting.

An interesting situation would occur if that defunct pool of numbers were reactivated and assigned to a completely different rate center. Any remaining ported numbers would have their rate center changed, a bizarre circumstance.

The RFC John Levine came up with said QoR is a possible scheme but didn't state where it's implemented, so I'm really curious how they'd handle my hypothetical.

I've been a Vonage customer from their very beginning. I am still with them today. I recommend them highly but not as anyone's only telephone service. Also, I would not port a valued number to them but I reached that conclusion early on.

I call England all the time for zero incremental cents per minute. ;-)

I also like having my primary number in Washington, DC, although I am in California.

RFC 3482 has a table that describes the state of portability in many countries as of 2003. Nobody's standardized on QoR but there are a few places where it's optional, and a lot of countries used Onward Routing (OR) which is basically call forwarding.

As to what would happen if the original network died in a QoR or OR scenario, it would be a problem. Realistically, I expect that the regulators would arrange for another carrier to take it over.

R's, John

I ported my Vonage number to Primus Lingo, and also call Europe all the time for zero incremental cents per minute. They're just like Vonage, only cheaper and with actual live people who answer the phone.

Well, sure, any VoIP provider offers that. I have numbers in California, Montreal, and England through a service in Belgium.

R's, John

I had my first issue for at least two years the other day. I sent them a trouble email and they responded within two hours. They reset it on their end and recommended what I do on my end. It was all fixed.

Then, about two hours after that a real live person called me to ask if it was working to my satisfaction.

I would love to have that kind of service from my wireline (Pac Bell/AT&T) and my cable company.