nanog mailing list archives

RE: Verizon PSTN continued

From: "Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () verizonbusiness com>
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 18:43:58 +0000 (GMT)



On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Wallace Keith wrote:


Working with 2 other carriers on a similar issue, response I rec'd was
congestion due to automated political dialers. Not sure if I believe
that or not...


you'd think they'd have systems monitoring that and trimming down the
'fat'? or can they do that? (legally I mean, sorta like QOS for the phone
network I suppose)

Current thread:

Verizon PSTN continued David Hubbard (Nov 07)
- Re: Verizon PSTN continued Jared Mauch (Nov 07)
  - Re: Verizon PSTN continued Steve Sobol (Nov 07)
- Re: Verizon PSTN continued Greg Boehnlein (Nov 07)
- Re: Verizon PSTN continued Thomas Beecher (Nov 08)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Verizon PSTN continued Wallace Keith (Nov 07)
  - RE: Verizon PSTN continued Chris L. Morrow (Nov 07)
    - Re: Verizon PSTN continued virendra rode // (Nov 07)
    - RE: Verizon PSTN continued Sean Donelan (Nov 09)
    - SprintLink peering issue in Chicago? Olsen, Jason (Nov 09)
    - Re: SprintLink peering issue in Chicago? Matthew Petach (Nov 09)
    - Re: Verizon PSTN continued Alexander Harrowell (Nov 10)