<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.blogger.com/styles/atom.css" type="text/css"?><feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom' xmlns:openSearch='http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/'><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17342912.post113891153036068739..comments</id><updated>2007-03-15T22:48:45.862-06:00</updated><title type='text'>Comments on Mark's Musings on the Telecommunications Industry: Does the FCC Need to Regulate VoIP LNP?</title><link rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://blog.inphotonicsresearch.com/feeds/113891153036068739/comments/default'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/113891153036068739/comments/default'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.inphotonicsresearch.com/2006/02/does-fcc-need-to-regulate-voip-lnp.html'/><author><name>Mark Milliman</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/14869864713464246424</uri><email>mark.milliman@comcast.net</email></author><generator version='7.00' uri='http://www.blogger.com'>Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>3</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>25</openSearch:itemsPerPage><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17342912.post-164938079508345068</id><published>2007-03-15T22:48:45.862-06:00</published><updated>2007-03-15T22:48:45.862-06:00</updated><title type='text'>I have been using tringotel business line for the ...</title><summary type='text'>I have been using tringotel business line for the past few months. No major complaints about call quality. &lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;Lots of great features and very easy to customize. But, there is no way to set up multiple voicemail boxes. You can use an answering machine with multiple boxes instead, but all of the great Voip voicemail features (including wav messages to email) are lost. Lingo and vonage might </summary><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/113891153036068739/comments/default/164938079508345068'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/113891153036068739/comments/default/164938079508345068'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.inphotonicsresearch.com/2006/02/does-fcc-need-to-regulate-voip-lnp.html?showComment=1174020525862#c164938079508345068' title=''/><author><name>Anonymous</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.inphotonicsresearch.com/2006/02/does-fcc-need-to-regulate-voip-lnp.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17342912.post-113891153036068739' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/posts/default/113891153036068739' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17342912.post-114592543504494929</id><published>2006-04-24T18:37:15.046-06:00</published><updated>2006-04-24T18:37:15.046-06:00</updated><title type='text'>Don:All VoIP providers should be able to port numb...</title><summary type='text'>Don:&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;All VoIP providers should be able to port numbers.  They don't actually own the number, the CLEC that they contract with to provide a connection to the PSTN owns them.  If a number is not portable it is because the VoIP provider's CLEC does not have a presence in that wire center.&lt;BR/&gt;&lt;BR/&gt;I need more information to know why your father's house cannot subscribe to Voicewing.  I </summary><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/113891153036068739/comments/default/114592543504494929'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/113891153036068739/comments/default/114592543504494929'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.inphotonicsresearch.com/2006/02/does-fcc-need-to-regulate-voip-lnp.html?showComment=1145925435046#c114592543504494929' title=''/><author><name>Mark Milliman</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/14869864713464246424</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='00001770189204283380'/></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.inphotonicsresearch.com/2006/02/does-fcc-need-to-regulate-voip-lnp.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17342912.post-113891153036068739' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/posts/default/113891153036068739' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17342912.post-114436495325442872</id><published>2006-04-06T17:09:13.256-06:00</published><updated>2006-04-06T17:09:13.256-06:00</updated><title type='text'>I agree that there shouldn't be that long a wait o...</title><summary type='text'>I agree that there shouldn't be that long a wait on porting numbers.  My question is, in my local state, West Virginia, why is it that some VoIP providers can port some local numbers, and not others.  Voicewing by Verizon is available in select areas, at my home it isn't, and my father's house which is 3 miles away it is.  We both have the same 3 digit prefix, but it's available at his house and </summary><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/113891153036068739/comments/default/114436495325442872'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/113891153036068739/comments/default/114436495325442872'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.inphotonicsresearch.com/2006/02/does-fcc-need-to-regulate-voip-lnp.html?showComment=1144364953256#c114436495325442872' title=''/><author><name>Don Freeman</name><uri>http://www.dmgolfclub.com</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.inphotonicsresearch.com/2006/02/does-fcc-need-to-regulate-voip-lnp.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17342912.post-113891153036068739' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/17342912/posts/default/113891153036068739' type='text/html'/></entry></feed>