Calling Features and LATAs [Telecom]

Calling Features and LATAs [Telecom]
NewsGroups | Search | Tools
User Password
Register Now! Lost Password?
 comp.dcom.telecom  Post an article  get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content  add this group's latest topics to your Google content  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
Calling Features and LATAs [Telecom] Sam Spade 06-30-2008
Posted by Sam Spade on June 30, 2008, 8:34 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
AT&T restricts some of its calling features to intra-LATA calls.

For example, Call Return (*69 in most areas) will not function if the
call came from outside the called party's LATA.

Call Selection, a feature to reject up to 10 directory numbers in a
list, will work only for intra-LATA numbers. Thus, the feature is
virtually useless because 98% of directory numbers are outside the
subscribing customer's LATA.

Selective Call Forwarding, a feature where up to 10 numbers in a list
will supposedly be forwarded to a designated number. This one is even
more kinky. Not only is it limited to intra-LATA directory numbers it
won't accept wireless numbers, nor directory numbers from indepentent
LOCs. Further, if a calling party on the list calls with caller id
blocked, the number won't forward.

Why would they sell such crippled features? Is there some FAA decree at
play here?

I do know that normal Call Forwarding (absent toll restriction), which
predates SS7 by many years, will work throughout the U.S., and perhaps
to Canada as well.


Posted by Steven Lichter on June 30, 2008, 9:32 pm
Sam Spade wrote:
> AT&T restricts some of its calling features to intra-LATA calls.
>
> For example, Call Return (*69 in most areas) will not function if the
> call came from outside the called party's LATA.
>
> Call Selection, a feature to reject up to 10 directory numbers in a
> list, will work only for intra-LATA numbers. Thus, the feature is
> virtually useless because 98% of directory numbers are outside the
> subscribing customer's LATA.
>
> Selective Call Forwarding, a feature where up to 10 numbers in a list
> will supposedly be forwarded to a designated number. This one is even
> more kinky. Not only is it limited to intra-LATA directory numbers it
> won't accept wireless numbers, nor directory numbers from indepentent
> LOCs. Further, if a calling party on the list calls with caller id
> blocked, the number won't forward.
>
> Why would they sell such crippled features? Is there some FAA decree at
> play here?
>
> I do know that normal Call Forwarding (absent toll restriction), which
> predates SS7 by many years, will work throughout the U.S., and perhaps
> to Canada as well.
>

I have one fix for not being able to block call from out of my area.
Back in 2000 I went into a Radio Shack store when I was working, they
had a table with products that had been returned as well as products
that they no longer would make, I found 6 CID boxes that had a block
option, when the call came in and you no longer wanted them to call,
you added it to the block and the next time, they would get a recording
from within the box. It also allowed you to block restricted, private
and so on. I sold a couple of them to friends and kept the rest. At
this point I'm still only using 1, but if I need to add more then I have
up to 40 numbers I can block. It seems to be doing the trick.

--
The Only Good Spammer is a Dead one!! Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2008 I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Co.


Posted by Sam Spade on July 1, 2008, 6:50 am
Steven Lichter wrote:
> Sam Spade wrote:
>
>> AT&T restricts some of its calling features to intra-LATA calls.
>>
>> For example, Call Return (*69 in most areas) will not function if the
>> call came from outside the called party's LATA.
>>
>> Call Selection, a feature to reject up to 10 directory numbers in a
>> list, will work only for intra-LATA numbers. Thus, the feature is
>> virtually useless because 98% of directory numbers are outside the
>> subscribing customer's LATA.
>>
>> Selective Call Forwarding, a feature where up to 10 numbers in a list
>> will supposedly be forwarded to a designated number. This one is even
>> more kinky. Not only is it limited to intra-LATA directory numbers it
>> won't accept wireless numbers, nor directory numbers from indepentent
>> LOCs. Further, if a calling party on the list calls with caller id
>> blocked, the number won't forward.
>>
>> Why would they sell such crippled features? Is there some FAA decree
>> at play here?
>>
>> I do know that normal Call Forwarding (absent toll restriction), which
>> predates SS7 by many years, will work throughout the U.S., and perhaps
>> to Canada as well.
>>
>
> I have one fix for not being able to block call from out of my area.
> Back in 2000 I went into a Radio Shack store when I was working, they
> had a table with products that had been returned as well as products
> that they no longer would make, I found 6 CID boxes that had a block
> option, when the call came in and you no longer wanted them to call,
> you added it to the block and the next time, they would get a recording
> from within the box. It also allowed you to block restricted, private
> and so on. I sold a couple of them to friends and kept the rest. At
> this point I'm still only using 1, but if I need to add more then I have
> up to 40 numbers I can block. It seems to be doing the trick.
>

I think you misread my post. Blocking calls is not my problem. I have
Privacy Manager for that.


Posted by T on July 2, 2008, 9:06 pm
diespammers@ikillspammers.com says...
> Sam Spade wrote:
> > AT&T restricts some of its calling features to intra-LATA calls.
> >
> > For example, Call Return (*69 in most areas) will not function if the
> > call came from outside the called party's LATA.
> >
> > Call Selection, a feature to reject up to 10 directory numbers in a
> > list, will work only for intra-LATA numbers. Thus, the feature is
> > virtually useless because 98% of directory numbers are outside the
> > subscribing customer's LATA.
> >
> > Selective Call Forwarding, a feature where up to 10 numbers in a list
> > will supposedly be forwarded to a designated number. This one is even
> > more kinky. Not only is it limited to intra-LATA directory numbers it
> > won't accept wireless numbers, nor directory numbers from indepentent
> > LOCs. Further, if a calling party on the list calls with caller id
> > blocked, the number won't forward.
> >
> > Why would they sell such crippled features? Is there some FAA decree at
> > play here?
> >
> > I do know that normal Call Forwarding (absent toll restriction), which
> > predates SS7 by many years, will work throughout the U.S., and perhaps
> > to Canada as well.
> >
>
> I have one fix for not being able to block call from out of my area.
> Back in 2000 I went into a Radio Shack store when I was working, they
> had a table with products that had been returned as well as products
> that they no longer would make, I found 6 CID boxes that had a block
> option, when the call came in and you no longer wanted them to call,
> you added it to the block and the next time, they would get a recording
> from within the box. It also allowed you to block restricted, private
> and so on. I sold a couple of them to friends and kept the rest. At
> this point I'm still only using 1, but if I need to add more then I have
> up to 40 numbers I can block. It seems to be doing the trick.
>
>

That's the thing about R-S. For a very long time they produced things
that had advanced features but they didn't know how to sell them.


Posted by Steven Lichter on July 3, 2008, 6:11 pm
T wrote:
>
> That's the thing about R-S. For a very long time they produced things
> that had advanced features but they didn't know how to sell them.

I agree, years ago when I was in college and the local stores sis their
own repairs; this was in the 1960's, I saw some very interesting
products that they had, I used to play with some of them. At one time
they had an R&D department in Texas that came up with some pretty
interesting products, most never made it to retail stores though.

--
The Only Good Spammer is a Dead one!! Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2008 I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Co.


Similar ThreadsPosted
Radio Shark and Laff-At-It (was Calling Features and LATAs) [Telecom] July 7, 2008, 6:39 pm
Re: Radio Shark and Laff-At-It (was Calling Features and LATAs) [Telecom] July 9, 2008, 8:14 pm
Re: [telecom] Radio Shark and Laff-At-It (was Calling Features and LATAs) [Telecom] July 10, 2008, 11:28 pm
LATAs, NPAs, CA, NV, etc. (Local 10-digit dialing?) [Telecom] March 31, 2008, 9:30 pm
So Maybe Apple Was onto Something / Rivals trying to come up with an iPhone slayer will need more than fancy features to outdo the leader [Telecom] April 22, 2008, 12:15 am
Help! Verizon/Fairpoint - Calling party control "never heard of it!" [Telecom] June 11, 2008, 11:10 pm
Skype Tests New Features November 8, 2006, 10:49 pm
June Commentary on Cellular Providers Features July 9, 2005, 10:51 am
Tuning Into the Times / Mobile Phones New Features August 3, 2005, 8:46 am
Yahoo Updates Messenger's Phone Features December 8, 2005, 2:43 pm

other useful resources:
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
Telecommunications Industry Association
Electronic and Software Security Products and Services
International Telecommunication Union

Custom CGI Perl and PHP programming by 1-Script.com

Contact Us | Privacy Policy
The site map in XML format XML site map