response 25 of 59:

Feb 14 01:28 UTC 2005

Grex has a broadband connection.  I wonder if it'd be possible to use 
a VOIP service, such as Vonage, to provide modem service?  With 
Vonage, the inbound, local, phone number is a matter of choice if 
you're locating within the area codes and exchanges that they offer.  
If they provide local Ann Arbor phone numbers, I could have one even 
though I live in Tecumseh.  Todd Plesco could have one.

I checked and Ann Arbor is on their list.

response 27 of 59:

Feb 14 19:26 UTC 2005

Re #25 and #26: I'll chime in here since you all are talking about
VoIP and telcos, which I do know a little about. :-)

The Vonage solution would not cost the end-users.  It would cost
Grex.  Vonage is just a service that delivers you telephone service
over the Internet.  At home, I use VoicePulse, which is much like
Vonage (but with a lot more features.)  Basically, I plug my
regular phones into a special box they sent.  This box hooks to
the Ethernet network at my house, which in turn has Internet access.
I pick up the phone, get a dialtone, dial a number, and it goes
through as normal.  I have a Chattanooga phone number that I can
give to anyone, they call it with their landline or cell phone,
and it rings to me.  They never know it's an IP phone.

However, I do not recommend we even explore that avenue.  The
conversion of audio into IP packets, transmission over the
Internet, and conversion back to analog or TDM adds so much
latency that modems can't handle it.  I see VoIP users pull their
hair out over their TiVo or DirecTV receiver that insists on
dialing up but can't.  Some people have luck using DSL filters
back-to-back, or by limiting the modems to 9600bps, etc.  But,
YMMV.  Not a viable solution for Grex in my book.

First, I'd explore the solutions from Provide.net.  I assume they
are a CLEC in Michigan (much like US LEC here in the southeast,
which we use in the office.)  US LEC has a switch in Chattanooga,
and our phones come in over a T1.  That same switch serves up
Cleveland (us), Chattanooga, Dayton, Rossville (Georgia) and other
exchanges.  From Cleveland, it's long distance to dial Rossville or
Dayton.  (US LEC lets us call all that free, but as far as the
ILEC, which is BellSouth, it's long distance.)  The ironic part of
that is if you have BellSouth and dial our office number (which is
local), you're routed to the US LEC switch in Chattanooga.  If you
are on BellSouth and dial a Dayton number for a US LEC customer,
you pay long distance rates, and are routed to that same switch.
Nice, isn't it?

That being said, it may be possible that Provide.net has their
own switch, and they could provide Ann Arbor numbers for you.

Also, another thought (and this is a bit late in the game, I
know):  Could Grex keep the same modem numbers that we've had
for ages via Local Number Portability?  It seems to me that
if Provide.net has Ann Arbor exchanges, then the old modem
number could be ported over to them.  If so, we could pull all
references to the new number, and let the call forwarding work
until the numbers are ported to the Provide.net modem lines.

Whoever deals with Provide.net here needs to get ahold of them
and see if they can help us on that respect.

Aside from that, here's a couple of other solutions:

  1) Find someone who has cable/DSL service at their house (and
     would allow Grex to use some bandwidth) and would be
     willing to allocate enough space for Grex's terminal server
     and some modems.  Move the old lines to their house, put
     all the equipment in, and have the terminal server run
     telnet across their connection to Grex.  This would run
     fine even behind a consumer broadband NAT router, since
     all the terminal server will do is make telnet connections
     out to Grex.

  2) Find out if your local ILEC (who provides the old modem lines)
     will allow you to get "Call Transfer" added to the lines.  If
     you can have multiple transferred calls in progress at once,
     this is even better.  (You'd only need 1 line!)  Put the line
     at somebody's house along with a small box.  This small box
     would pick up on an incoming call, flash the line (as if it
     were making a 3-way call), dial the new modem number, then
     hangup.  The original caller would be transferred to the
     modems.  Before anyone laughs, www.greatamericaconnection.com
     uses that.  I used it every day for over a year and a half to
     call a g/f in Knoxville.  You'd punch in her number and it'd
     flash a couple times (and take about 30 seconds to go through)
     but basically transferred from one node to another to avoid the
     toll charges. :)  Of course, this may sound awkward to callers
     because of hearing a signle ring, two clicks, and then more
     ringing, but it works.

  3) Have the line put into someone's house and have simple call
     forwarding added to it.  However, here in BellSouth area,
     they only allow 1 forwarded call active at a time.  Forward
     it to the new modem number.

  4) See if the telco can create it in their switch as a virtual
     forwarding number.  In other words, no real copper pair will
     be associated to it, it's a number that exists only in the
     switch.

There are a lot of "hacks" that would enable this to work.  But,
I motion that we contact Provide.net first, find out if they have
a solution or not, and then we'll start talking about hacks to make
it work if they don't have a way.

response 29 of 59:

Feb 14 20:35 UTC 2005

Thanks for clearing that up!  Seriously, I used to work for a dialup ISP
about 5 years ago (just starting out in the field, and didn't know squat
about telecoms) and when we moved our modem pools from our building to
a co-lo, we couldn't port our number.  Even though the new number we were
assigned was in the same ratecenter.  That "at the same location" (which
was also not the case for us) is probably why we had to change.

Actually, I didn't know that was even in there.  Shows you how much I
am up on laws and such.  Guess I should pay more attention!

response 31 of 59:

Feb 15 02:18 UTC 2005

One other possibility is to have two phone lines installed in Ann Arbor,
connect them to a router, and go that route.  It would mean finding
housing for such a deal, but Ken Asher has already hinted he wouldn't mind
doing this out of Communications Electronics.  (This will bring back
feelings of deja vu from those who were here, in the beginning.)  Again,
not sure what the end costs associated with this would run, but certainly
it would mean another round of installation costs.

But I think it's nice of Ken to be open to such a thing.

response 33 of 59:

Feb 15 22:24 UTC 2005

Many thanks to mary for checking into things!

response 35 of 59:

Feb 17 14:52 UTC 2005

(Plus we'd pay the Internet connection cost for whatever feeds those two lines
into Grex.)

response 37 of 59:

Feb 17 16:55 UTC 2005

Are there any ISP's around on the outskirts that would be willing to setup
a userid that automatically telnets to grex rather than initiating PPP?
I would imagine that would be cheaper if they exist.  $25/mo is HIGH

response 39 of 59:

Feb 17 18:38 UTC 2005

There goes your trifecta

response 41 of 59:

Feb 17 19:55 UTC 2005

The rep from SBC called back to say the other options he explored 
would all cost us more than simply installing another line, in Ann 
Arbor, and forwarding calls from that phone to Grex.  The charges 
would amount to $27.30 a month for the phone plus a one time charge 
of $42.10 for installation and a $84 trip charge. 

An unlimited Provide.net account is $14.95 per month.  This would be 
a great solution for someone in Saline, Manchester or elsewhere who 
can no longer call to Grex as a local call.  But if you can't afford 
it it doesn't matter how nice the service.  I've contacted Provide 
to ask if they'd allow us to take out an accout to be shared among 
our few known non-local dialin users.  They're going to get back to 
me. 

response 43 of 59:

Feb 17 21:20 UTC 2005

Are these telnet accounts or are we talking about giving PPP accounts to
Saline, Manchester or elsewhere users?

response 45 of 59:

Feb 17 23:33 UTC 2005

Thanks, Mary!

response 47 of 59:

Feb 18 05:25 UTC 2005

Thanks, Brett!

response 49 of 59:

Feb 18 06:29 UTC 2005

Thanks, Arc!