quote:

---

>1 week ago I called TMo and asked them to change the name sent with CID
>to "Wireless Caller" instead of my name, as it was before the voicemail
>system changed. I asked them to do this on both of my TMo numbers (one
>is my wife's). They said OK and advised that it could take up to 72
>hours to complete the change. Fair enough.
> The next day, we both had to go through the voicemail setup process and
>I assumed that the CID name was changed. Testing, I found that it
>wasn't.
> Called TMo and they said it was setup in their system to send "Wireless
>Caller" and not my name and said to give it up to a week. I did and it
>didn't so I just called again. This time, the rep again verified that
>their system was set to send "Wireless Caller" and placed me on hold to
>discuss it with her supervisor.
> When she came back on the line she told me that they had to send an
>email to SPRINT(!) to make the change. I asked why Sprint was involved
>and she wasn't sure but that was what they had to do and to allow
>another 72 hours. Neither of our numbers were ported from Sprint.
>Anybody know what's up with the TMo Sprint relationship? Maybe they use
>Sprint's long distance network or rent space on their switch?
>

quote:

---

> 1 week ago I called TMo and asked them to change the name sent with CID
> to "Wireless Caller" instead of my name, as it was before the voicemail
> system changed. I asked them to do this on both of my TMo numbers (one
> is my wife's). They said OK and advised that it could take up to 72
> hours to complete the change. Fair enough.
> The next day, we both had to go through the voicemail setup process and
> I assumed that the CID name was changed. Testing, I found that it
> wasn't.
> Called TMo and they said it was setup in their system to send "Wireless
> Caller" and not my name and said to give it up to a week. I did and it
> didn't so I just called again. This time, the rep again verified that
> their system was set to send "Wireless Caller" and placed me on hold to
> discuss it with her supervisor.
> When she came back on the line she told me that they had to send an
> email to SPRINT(!) to make the change. I asked why Sprint was involved
> and she wasn't sure but that was what they had to do and to allow
> another 72 hours. Neither of our numbers were ported from Sprint.
> Anybody know what's up with the TMo Sprint relationship? Maybe they use
> Sprint's long distance network or rent space on their switch?

quote:

---

> On Thu, 26 May 2005 04:49:32 GMT, "BruceR" <brNOSPAM@hawaii.com>
> wrote:
>
> I would imagine Sprint completes the "back end" portion of the call,
> once it leaves TM's wireless infrastructure and goes into the public
> telephone system. Sprint does the same kind of work for most major
> VoIP providers, including Road Runner's Digital Phone.

quote:

---

> In <3byle.34583$ya2.25707@tornado.socal.rr.com> "BruceR"
> <brNOSPAM@hawaii.com> writes:
>
>
> It's a bit more complicated than you've been led to believe.
>
> The _number_ in Caller ID is sent along with the "setup" of the phone
> call, so is available to the final central office (and to the
> receiving
> phone if CNID is unblocked) at the exact same time.
>
> However, the _name_ is NOT sent the same way. Rather, the receiving
> central office (or, more likely, some intermediate gateway, but let's
> not
> go there) gets the number and does a _reverse_ database lookup.
>
> Now the actual databse in use is, well, somewhere or another. If
> you're
> calling from inside a traditional wireline telco RBOC to another
> phone in
> the same company, they've got the billing/directory info in house and
> you
> get it accurately.
>
> On the other hand, if there's a long distance call involved to a
> different
> company, well all bets are off. The company receiving the call has to
> know
> where to do the database dip, _and_ that often is NOT the place the
> call
> came from.
>
> Why? two reasons:
>
> a) the originating company charges for the database dip. The
> receiving company doesn't want to pay, so they'll look for
> a secondary, and cheaper (and often less accurate) provider.
>
> NOTE that this is similar to the problem nowadays
> when you make a "directory assistance" call...
>
> b) maintaining that data base, and making it available
> for instant lookup, isn't that eay. So some places
> will hand it off to a third party.
>
> Oh, and for good measure, if there'e number portability involved
> and the riginating phone has moved from the company that used to
> "own" the prefix to another, there are plenty of headachess...
>
> --
> ____________________
____________________
_____________
> Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
> dannyb@panix.com
> [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

quote:

---

>That might also mean that calls I
>place to different cities or even different carriers would still receive
>the name depending on what database they tap.