sundance-communications.com/forum Forums Wiring - Telecom Carriers - Trunks & Services Telecom Service & Providers Incorrect info from phone company

Do you find that you are often given incorrect information when inquiring about services, specifically about the compatibility of two services?

Two cases which come to mind here, one fairly recent, the other from a while ago.

#1. I was assured by two initial contacts for an order that there would be no problem ordering DSL for one line of a two-line hunt group. After a lot of delay and a lot of calling around, I was eventually told "no, we don't do that."

#2. We have what BT calls its "Call-Sign" service, a second number on the same line with distinctive ringing. I wanted to find out if there was an option to allow call-forwarding to operate on the main number only. The sales team came back and said yes, but to be sure I sent an e-mail to the (supposedly) technical support section. Got the same answer, so I went ahead and ordered.

When the secondary number went active, I found that both numbers were forwarding, called to request the change and after a lot of uncertainty I eventually managed to speak with somebody at the real technical department. He immediately said that there was no such option in the software.

Our phone companies don't like to put DSL on a hunt group line, but they will. They also just started offering "naked" DSL.

We can work our way around the Distinctive Ringing issue if the second number is a fax. You set the fax up using the distinctive ring cadence and it answers as soon as it detects the ringing (2nd ring or whatever). Then, you order CF-No answer and your single ring follows those rules.

My favorite is the "is it in the tariffs" excuse for fixing mistakes. I had a customer who has Centrex. The rule is 3 lines minimum or 4 of you have a 7 year contract. He called to terminate the lines, and they told him he could keep 2 lines only. I laughed at him, because I knew that he wasn't going to get that through the programmer. Sure enough, the next day he called back to tell me that they "made a mistake."

I guess phone companies are alike everywhere.


Carl

I used a similar trick with a modem without the distinctive ring. The comms script just looks for incoming CLID and sends an ATA to the modem if it's one of three specific numbers, otherwise it ignores the call and lets it forward.

The problem we had was that some callers were complaining about the delay.

Lines served out of a system Y (Ericsson AXE10) office have the ability to choose the time delay when setting call forwarding, but on BT's system X which serves this area it's fixed -- Approx. 20 seconds of ringing, then another 10 secs. of repeating message "Please hold the line, calls to this number are being diverted," and only then does it forward and ring.

We have an immediate, unconditional forwarding option, but using that means that the original number called never rings at all. The second number with no forwarding would have been a convenient way to use that unconditional forward while still allowing access to the modem.

I came up with a partial solution to get around the problem in the end, but it's a bit of a kludge.

You can get three types of information - late, useless, or wrong. You don't get to pick which and you might not know which you're going to get, but it will be one. ;-)

Both of your requests are available here in Canada.

The 2nd we call Identi-call is only availabe on a stand alone line with no hunting. I currently have your exect setup. 2 numbers and only the primary number is forwardable. I guess it depends on the telco equipment.

I can't see any technical reason why BT won't put DSL on one line of a hunt group. After all, it only has to be strapped across from the DSLAM to the appropriate physical line -- It doesn't directly involve the line concentrator or other voice equipment at all. Just "policy."

The forward on one number only would really have made the job easier. Basically, the setup is that operations are transferred to the boss' home some evenings, so I ZIP the database for transfer to the remote computer, then have the office computer set up call forwarding via the comms script. Obviously at the end of the evening we send the database back ready for the next morning and cancel the call forwarding.

In the end, I set it up so that the office system sets up immediate unconditional CF when the first transfer is complete, then sits and waits until 10 p.m. (or whatever time they select) before setting up forward-no-answer and canceling unconditional CF so that they can dial into the system again. That way they can still get calls after the 10 p.m. (or whenever) cutoff, but the bulk of callers during the main part of the evening don't have to wait 30 seconds or more for the calls to timeout and forward.

As I said, it's something of a kludge, but the only way I could get it to work with just the single line. A second line for the computer would make it much simpler, but they can't justify the expense.

We do actually have DSL operating at both ends now, and I've thought about the possibility of using that to do the database transfer and send the CF commands, but to be honest I'm loathed to commit the integrity of the system to it, given that a DSL/ISP outage would render everything inoperable and that the current arrangement will still work so long as basic POTS is working.

Since DSL technically "rides" on only one wire of the pair, I can't see what difference it would make. Even a ground start PBX trunk provides a pair of wires from the CO to the premises.

I agree with the thinking that it's really more about policy and keeping the "smart" people working in the same department.