Destination Country Destination Network MCC MNC
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
ITC Deltacom
AT&T Kentucky T: 502.582.8219 @at&t 601 W. Chestnut Street F: 502.582.1573 Room 407 [email protected] Louisville, KY 40203 July 22, 2008 Ms. Stephanie Stumbo Executive Director Public Service Commission 211 Sower Boulevard P. 0. Box 615 Frankfort, KY 40602 Re: Filing of Amendments Dear Ms. Stumbo: Enclosed for filing is a CD-ROM containing the following Amendments. These documents have been electronically filed with the Commission. Business Telecom, Inc. Interconnection Amendment /qq7- oo!>OB P.C.B. Communications, Inc. Case No. 00056 .. flM !B Resale Amendment Case No. 00592 -AM tP~ ITC"DeltaCom Communications, Inc. Interconnection Amendment Jef11 .. 0()130 TelCove Operations, Inc. Case No. 00141-At'k /1 Interconnection Amendment 2£()0-00tf1/ Case No. 00354 --A-M.. ¢Jq MClmetro Access Transmission Services, LLC Interconnection Amendment /qqtp-oo4!tl Case No. 00038-11'11. Jl Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Enclosure 716384 ~ Pmud \pof•MW of lht! u fJ. Olympk Tt\1m AMENDMENT TO EXTEND TERM DATE/AT&T-9STATE PAGE 1 of 1 DeltaCom - KY VERSION - 03/05/08 AMENDMENT TO INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT UNDER SECTIONS 251 AND 252 OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996 BETWEEN BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. d/b/a AT&T ALABAMA, AT&T FLORIDA, AT&T GEORGIA, AT&T KENTUCKY, AT&T LOUISIANA, AT&T MISSISSIPPI, AT&T NORTH CAROLINA, AT&T SOUTH CAROLINA AND AT&T TENNESSEE AND ITC^DELTACOM COMMUNICATIONS, INC. d/b/a ITC^DELTACOM D/B/A GRAPEVINE The Interconnection Agreement dated December 5, 2003 by and between BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. -
Tmobile No Contract Phones and Plans
Tmobile No Contract Phones And Plans Ultraist Lazaro whitens or kep some poignancy assembled, however shapeliest Leonerd plasticises midnightly or enkindled. Barbate Jehu attempts some trammeller after unactable Verney single-foot sometimes. Godwin remains sunburst: she reference her pouter gird too irksomely? Any of these plans include wireless addresses in and no contract phones plans or computer question If i phone is GSM and accepts a SIM card, then cell phone bill most likely unlocked. What will function technically, taxes and sprint plans and how can talk! Log in control intelligent software for tmobile sim phone at home without editions but there is fully paid compared. The no taxes or fees guarantee is bait the price of demand plan that While buying a defence plan to be a relatively complicated process with huge number. Senior list of your network in low risk of your existing phone carrier or two lines! However, that comes with a attorney of caveats. Request RA Request on Track RA or SWAP Status Business Warranty Enhanced Service Plan comparison-star Service. The Best Prepaid Cell Phone Plans of 2021 Lifewire. And the prepaid unlimited plans from carriers like Verizon and T-Mobile block things like HD video streaming and the ability to clutter your phone. Where clean I use my stomach with prepaid plans? Canceling your number of the plans and no contract phones? Will iPhone 6 still broad in 2020? Residential small company list should be responsible for tmobile to complete your old number is owned subsidiary of its services. Prices include a variety of tmobile and opening days of tmobile prepaid smartphone for years worth a sim cards are included with my kids give it? It to enjoy convenient for tmobile allow you no more mainstream providers with prepaid virgin has your tmobile and no contract phones to them have a carrier while others with. -
SMS) Transit Via SMS Gateways
Carriers providing Short Message Service (SMS) transit via SMS gateways. This list explains which email address to use if one wants to send an email and have it arrive as a text message on someone's phone. The number must contain no punctuation. For instance, to send to a number typically expressed in the United States as 987-555-0100, one would email 9875550100@SMS- gateway. Some carriers have multiple gateways. The SMS gateway refers to Short Message Services which are capable of transmitting plain text messages only. MMS refers to "Multimedia Messaging Services" which are generally capable of carrying messages which include text, pictures and audio [email protected] (SMS), [email protected] (MMS) (Note: AT&T Mobility United States This gateway fails to handle complete phone numbers; the country code must be omitted, leaving only the ten-digit NANP number.) [email protected] AT&T Mobility (formerly [email protected] United States Cingular) [email protected] [email protected] AT&T Enterprise Paging United States [email protected] AT&T Global Smart Messaging United States [email protected] Suite - Powered By Soprano BellSouth United States [email protected] [email protected] (SMS) Bluegrass Cellular United States [email protected] (MMS) Global Telematic Solutions, LLC • PO Box 269 • Meridian, ID 83680 • Tel 855-487-9679 • Fax 855-487-9680 www.gtsfleet.com [email protected] (SMS) Boost Mobile United States [email protected] (MMS) Cellcom United States -
Hadley, Ryan E **** This Is an EXTERNAL Email. Exercise Caution. DO NOT Open Attachments Or Click Links from Unknown Senders Or
Hadley, Ryan E From: Liane Steffes <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 4:56 PM To: Comments, Urc; Heline, Beth E. Cc: Jeremy Fetty; [email protected] Subject: IUSF-Broadband Study - Comments of INECA Attachments: INECA - GAO 2018-3 - Comments of INECA with Attachments.PDF **** This is an EXTERNAL email. Exercise caution. DO NOT open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email. **** Good Afternoon: Attached please find the comments of INECA responsive to the study topics set forth in the Commission’s GAO 2018-3 (IUSF-Broadband Study). Kind regards, Liane K. Steffes 251 N. Illinois Street, Suite 1800 | Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 Phone: 317-269-2500 | www.parrlaw.com This email originated from the law firm Parr Richey Frandsen Patterson Kruse LLP. The information contained in this email may be privileged and confidential and is intended solely for the use of the addressee(s) indicated above. Anyone receiving this email in error should notify the sender by telephone and destroy the original. 1 COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF INDIANA EXCHANGE CARRIER ASSOCIATION, INC. TO THE INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION REGARDING IUSF-BROADBAND STUDY Comments of Indiana Exchange Carrier Association, Inc. Page 1 of 12 COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF INDIANA EXCHANGE CARRIER ASSOCIATION, INC. TO THE INDIANA UTILITY REGULATORY COMMISSION REGARDING IUSF-BROADBAND STUDY The Indiana Exchange Carrier Association, Inc. (“INECA”) and its member companies are dedicated to the promotion of state-of-the-art telecommunications facilities and services throughout rural Indiana. The purpose of INECA is to advocate for its member companies on federal and state issues, to educate government leaders, as well as the public at large, on the importance of modern telecommunications to rural communities and to ensure that voice, broadband and video services comparable to those available in urban and suburban areas are available in the rural areas of Indiana at affordable prices. -
MB Docket No. ) File. No CSR- -P WAVEDIVISION HOLDINGS, LLC ) ASTOUND BROADBAND, LLC ) EXPEDITED TREATMENT ) REQUESTED Petitioners, ) ) V
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 ) In the Matter of: ) ) MB Docket No. ) File. No CSR- -P WAVEDIVISION HOLDINGS, LLC ) ASTOUND BROADBAND, LLC ) EXPEDITED TREATMENT ) REQUESTED Petitioners, ) ) v. ) ) COMCAST SPORTSCHANNEL PACIFIC ) ASSOCIATES ) COMCAST SPORTSNET CALIFORNIA, LLC ) COMCAST SPORTSNET NORTHWEST, LLC) NBCUNIVERSAL MEDIA, LLC ) ) Respondent Programmers ) ) TO THE COMMISSION: PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING THAT CONDUCT VIOLATES 47 U.S.C. § 548(b) James A. Penney Eric Breisach General Counsel WaveDivision Holdings, LLC Breisach Cordell PLLC 401 Parkplace Center, Suite 500 5335 Wisconsin Ave., NW, Suite 440 Kirkland, WA 98033 Washington, DC 20015 (425) 896-1891 (202) 751-2701 Its Attorneys Date: December 19, 2017 SUMMARY This Petition is about the conduct of three Comcast-owned regional sports networks whose deliberate actions undermined the fundamental structure of their distribution agreements with a cable operator and then, when the operator could no longer meet minimum contractual penetration percentages, presented the operator with a Hobson’s choice: (1) restructure its services through a forced bundling scheme in a way that would make them commercially and competitively unviable; or (2) face shut-off of the services four days later. These efforts to hinder significantly or prevent the operator from providing this programming are not only prohibited by 47 U.S.C. 548(b), but are particularly egregious because they are taken against the only terrestrial competitor to Comcast’s cable systems in the areas served by the cable operator. It was only after the Comcast regional sports networks extracted a payment of approximately $2.4 million and a promise to pay even more on an ongoing basis – amounts far in excess of what would have been required by the distribution agreements, was the imminent threat to withhold the services withdrawn. -
Funding for the Telecommunications Relay
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION In the Matter of: FUNDING FOR THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ) CASE NO. RELAY SERVICE ) 2017 -00358 ORDER On September 14, 2017, the Commission issued an Order in this proceeding requiring that the Telecommunications Relay Service ("TRS") fund surcharge be reduced by one cent ($0.01) to one cent ($0.01) per month effective January 1, 2018. In addition, the Commission established a deadline to receive comments regarding a frequency schedule for the Commission to review the TRS fund and related surcharge in the future. The Commission received no comments. The Commission finds that it will conduct a formal review of the TRS fund and the surcharge on an annual basis. Annual reviews of the TRS fund should reduce the potential for large balance shortfalls and overages. Annual reviews will commence approximately 120 days from the end of the calendar year, with the goal of implementing any changes on the first day of the following calendar year. The goal would also be to issue an order within 60 days of the initiation of the annual review so that providers will have ample time to implement any changes, if ordered. These annual formal reviews would be in addition to ongoing monitoring and would not prevent the Commission from making any changes in the interim period. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. The Commission annually will conduct a fo rmal review of the TRS fund to determine if a change in the surcharge is warranted. 2. This case is closed and removed from the Commission's docket. -
Telecommunication Provider 5Linx Accessline Communications ACN Communications Services, Inc
Telecommunication Provider 5Linx Accessline Communications ACN Communications Services, Inc. AmeriVision Communications, Inc. dba Affinity 4 and Lifeline Communications Airnex Communications, Inc. Allvoi Americatel Corporation ANPI Business, LLC fka Zone Telecom, LLC AT Conference, Inc. AT&T Corp. BA Telecom, Inc. BBG Communications, Inc. Billing Concepts, Inc. (Refered us to AT&T as provider) Birch Telcom of the West Inc. dba Birch Communications BullsEye Telecom Cbeyond Communications LLC Century Link Communications Cincinnati Bell Any Distance Consumer Cellular Convergia Cox California Telecom, LLC Cricket Communications, Inc./AT&T Mobility Earthlink Business, LLC ‐ Earthlink, LLC ‐ Earthlink, Inc. Enhanced Communications Network INC. E. / Everything Wireless First Communications Flash Wireless Globalstar USA LLC Granite Telecommunications LLC GreatCall, Inc. dba Jitterbug IBM Global Network Systems IDT Domestic Telecom inContact, Inc. Intellicall Operator Services Intelafone LLC Intermedia Voice Services I‐Wireless LDMI Telecommunications, Inc. Level 3 Communications LightYear Network Solutions Lingo, Inc Los Angeles SMSA Limited Partnership Matrix Telecom, Inc. Mitel Net Solutions Page 1 of 2 Telecommunication Provider MCI Communications Services, Inc. Mpower Communications Corp. Network Innovations New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC NTT Docomo USA Nextel of California nexVortex, Inc. Nobel Tel, LLC OnStar LLC Ooma, Inc. Opex Communications, Inc. Pacific Bell Telephone Company PAETEC Communications Payment One Corp Phone.com, Inc. Pioneer Telephone PNG Telecommunications, Inc. Primus Telecommunications Ready Wireless SBC Long Distance, LLC Securus Technologies, Inc. Sonic Telecom, LLC Sprint Communications Company, L.P. Sprint Nextel/Spectrum Sprint Telephony PCS, LP Talk America, Inc. Telscape Communications, Inc. TING Globalinx Enterprise, Inc. fka Tri‐M Communications, Inc. T‐Mobile West LLC Metro PCS California, LLC Total Call International, Inc. -
Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review
BROADCASTING AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LEGISLATIVE REVIEW APPENDIX 4 TO SUBMISSION OF CANADIAN NETWORK OPERATORS CONSORTIUM INC. TO THE BROADCASTING AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LEGISLATIVE REVIEW PANEL 11 JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF RECONSIDERATION OF TELECOM DECISION 2017-56 REGARDING FINAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR WHOLESALE MOBILE WIRELESS ROAMING SERVICE, TELECOM NOTICE OF CONSULTATION CRTC 2017-259, 20 JULY 2017 SUPPLEMENTAL INTERVENTION OF ICE WIRELESS INC. 27 OCTOBER 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 8 1.1 A note on terminology ................................................................................................................ 9 2.0 SUMMARY OF DR. VON WARTBURG’S REPORT ............................................................... 10 3.0 CANADA’S MOBILE WIRELESS MARKET IS NOT COMPETITIVE .................................. 13 3.1 Canada’s mobile wireless market is extremely concentrated in the hands of the three national wireless carriers ........................................................................................................................ 14 3.2 Mobile wireless penetration rates and mobile data usage indicate that the mobile wireless market is not sufficiently competitive...................................................................................... -
H-1B Petition Approvals for Initial Benefits by Employers FY07
NUMBER OF H-1B PETITIONS APPROVED BY USCIS FOR INITIAL BENEFICIARIES FY 2007 Approved Employer Petitions INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED 4,559 WIPRO LIMITED 2,567 SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LTD 1,396 COGNIZANT TECH SOLUTIONS US CORP 962 MICROSOFT CORP 959 TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES LIMITED 797 PATNI COMPUTER SYSTEMS INC 477 US TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES LLC 416 I-FLEX SOLUTIONS INC 374 INTEL CORPORATION 369 ACCENTURE LLP 331 CISCO SYSTEMS INC 324 ERNST & YOUNG LLP 302 LARSEN & TOUBRO INFOTECH LIMITED 292 DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 283 GOOGLE INC 248 MPHASIS CORPORATION 248 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO 246 AMERICAN UNIT INC 245 JSMN INTERNATIONAL INC 245 OBJECTWIN TECHNOLOGY INC 243 DELOITTE CONSULTING LLP 242 PRINCE GEORGES COUNTY PUBLIC SCHS 238 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 236 MOTOROLA INC 234 MARLABS INC 229 KPMG LLP 227 GOLDMAN SACHS & CO 224 TECH MAHINDRA AMERICAS INC 217 VERINON TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS LTD 213 THE JOHNS HOPKINS MED INSTS OIS 205 YASH TECHNOLOGIES INC 202 ADVANSOFT INTERNATIONAL INC 201 UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND 199 BALTIMORE CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 196 PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP 192 POLARIS SOFTWARE LAB INDIA LTD 191 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 191 EVEREST BUSINESS SOLUTIONS INC 190 IBM CORPORATION 184 APEX TECHNOLOGY GROUP INC 174 NEW YORK CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 171 SOFTWARE RESEARCH GROUP INC 167 EVEREST CONSULTING GROUP INC 165 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA 163 GSS AMERICA INC 160 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED 158 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 151 MASCON GLOBAL CONSULTING INC 150 MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC 149 THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 147 STANFORD UNIVERSITY 146 COLUMBIA -
5G Implementation in Non-EU Countries of Europe Region
5G IMPLEMENTATION IN NON-EU COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPE REGION ITU Regional Initiative for Europe on Broadband Infrastructure, Broadcasting and Spectrum Management © ITU November 2020 Version 1.2 5G Implementation in non-EU countries of the Europe Region ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This paper was developed by the ITU Office for Europe within the framework of the ITU Regional Initiative for Europe on broadband infrastructure, broadcasting and spectrum management. It was elaborated by ITU Office for Europe team including Mr. Iago Bojczuk, Junior Policy Analyst, and Mr. Julian McNeill, Consultant, under the supervision and direction of Mr. Jaroslaw Ponder, Head of ITU Office for Europe. Moreover, important feedback has been provided to this report by: - Electronic and Postal Communications Authority (AKEP), Albania; - Ministry of Infrastructure and Energy, Albania; - Communications Regulatory Agency (CRA), Bosnia and Herzegovina; - Post and Telecom Administration (PTA), Iceland; - Ministry of Communications of Israel; - Office for Communications of Liechtenstein; - Ministry of Economy and Infrastructure of Moldova; - National Regulatory Agency for Electronic Communications and Information Technology (ANRCETI); - Ministry of Economy, Montenegro; - Agency for Electronic Communications and Postal Services (EKIP), Montenegro; - Ministry of Information Society and Administration, North Macedonia; - Agency for Electronic Communications of North Macedonia; - Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Telecommunications, Serbia; - Information and Communication Technologies Authority, Turkey; - National Commission for the State Regulation of Communications and Informatization, Ukraine; - Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS), United Kingdom; - Dicastero per la Comunicazione - Direzione Tecnologica, Vatican City. The paper was prepared as the background contribution to the ITU Regional Forum for Europe on 5G strategies, policies and implementation, held on 22 and 23 October 2020. -
EE LIMITED and (2) HUTCHISON 3G UK LIMITED
SECOND DIVISION, INNER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION [2021] CSIH 27 XA63/20 Lord Justice Clerk Lord Malcolm Lord Doherty OPINION OF THE COURT delivered by LORD MALCOLM in the appeal by (1) EE LIMITED and (2) HUTCHISON 3G UK LIMITED Appellants against JOHN STEWART DUNCAN Respondent Appellants: Barne QC; Shepherd and Wedderburn LLP Respondent: Upton; Davidson Chalmers Stewart LLP 7 May 2021 [1] This is an appeal against a decision of the Lands Tribunal for Scotland (the tribunal). The main issue concerns the proper approach to paragraph 33(14) of the Electronic Communications Code contained in schedule 3A to the Communications Act 2003, as amended by the Digital Economy Act 2017. This new code replaced the old code set out in schedule 2 to the Telecommunications Act 1984. In terms of transitional provisions the old code remains relevant to agreements made under it. 2 Background [2] In 2003 Mr John Stewart Duncan (the owner) entered into an agreement with EE Ltd, which that company subsequently assigned to itself and Hutchison 3G UK Ltd (the operators), granting certain rights to keep, operate and inspect telecommunications apparatus on a site at Wester Dullatur Farm, North Lanarkshire. After the expiry of the agreed term in 2012 the lease has continued from year to year by way of tacit relocation (a rule under Scots law whereby a lease will be extended beyond its agreed term if neither party serves a notice ending the agreement). [3] In 2018 the operators sought agreement as to a new lease containing provisions designed to update the agreement in accordance with the minimum provisions imposed by the new code, including assignation rights; ability to share and upgrade the facilities without additional payment; and a “no network scheme” basis for the assessment of rental and compensation (which would be less costly for the operators). -
IMSI TAP , (Kb) , (USD) Andorra MOBILAND 21303 ANDMA 1 0,09
IMSI TAP Mobile Rounding Cost, Country (International Mobile (country operator session, (kb) (USD) Subscriber Identity) abbreviations) Andorra MOBILAND 21303 ANDMA 1 0,09 Albania 27601 50 0,3 Antigua and Barbuda 338050,33805 100 0,2 Antigua and Barbuda 344920 1 0,2 Argentine CLARO 72231 ARGCM 1 0,09 Argentine UNIFON 72207 ARGTM 1 0,09 Armenia Orange (UCOM) 28310 ARMOR 1 0,05 Australia OPTUS 50502 AUSOP 1 0,05 Australia 50501 0,05 Telstra MobileNet AUSTA 1 Austria A1 23201 AUTPT 1 0,05 Austria Orange 23205 AUTCA 1 0,05 Azerbaijan AZERCELL GSM 40001 AZEAC 1 0,09 Bahrain 42604 100 0,4 Belarus BeST 25704 BLRBT 1 0,05 Belarus MTS 25702 BLR02 1 0,05 Belgium BASE 20620 BELKO 1 0,05 Belgium Orange Belgium 20610 BELMO 1 0,05 Belgium PROXIMUS 20601 BELTB 1 0,05 Bosnia-Herzegovina 21890 10 0,3 Brazil CLARO 72405 BRACL 1 0,09 Brazil Tim Brasil 72402 BRARN 1 0,09 Brazil Tim Brasil 72403 BRASP 1 0,09 Brazil Tim Brasil 72404 BRACS 1 0,09 Brazil Vivo SA 72406 BRAK5 1 0,09 Brazil Vivo SA 72410 BRAK4 1 0,09 Brazil Vivo SA 72411 BRAK6 1 0,09 Brazil Vivo SA 72423 BRAK9 1 0,09 British Virgin Islands 338050,33805, 348770 0,2 100 British Virgin Islands 348170 1 0,2 Bulgaria A1 Bulgaria 28401 BGR01 1 0,05 Bulgaria Vivacom 28403 BGRVA 1 0,05 Canada ROGERS 30272 CANRW 1 0,09 Chile CLARO 73003 CHLSM 1 0,09 Chile ENTEL PCS 73001 CHLMV 1 0,09 Chile TELEFONICA 73002 CHLTM 1 0,09 China CHINA MOBILE 46000 CHNCT 1 0,09 China CHINA MOBILE 46002 CHNCM 1 0,09 CHINA UNICOM China 46001 0,09 GSM CHNCU 1 Colombia COMCEL 73210 COLCM 1 0,09 Costa Rica CLARO 71203 CRICL 1 0,09 Croatia A1 Hrvatska 21910 HRVVI 1 0,05 Cyprus CYTAGSM 28001 CYPCT 1 0,05 Cyprus MTN 28010 CYPSC 1 0,05 Czech.Rep.