federal NRO number assignment rules ?

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?
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voippuck.nether.net
h
ttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

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.charlesgmail.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 <d4rkf1bergmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 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?
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voippuck.nether.net
> > h
ttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voippuck.nether.net
h
ttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip