Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: "Marc T. Kaufman" Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: 800 ANI - Is the Whole Number Neccessary? Message-ID: <10726@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 11 Aug 90 18:26:17 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University Lines: 33 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 561, Message 5 of 10 In article <10702@accuvax.nwu.edu> johnd@ocpt.ccur.com (John Decatur KA2QHD) writes: -> In article <10445@accuvax.nwu.edu> John Higdon -> writes: -> >Ok, folks, time to set this straight. There is confusion here. 800 ANI -> >sends the CALLING number NOT the billing number. ........ >Ack. No it doesn't. Sorry John. The IXC receives only the billing >number via carrier interconnection signaling. The IXC never receives >the calling party number; therefore, it is only possible for the IXC >to deliver to the called party the billing number. I expect the truth lies somewhere between these two. On my residential two-line hunt group each line is identified by its CALLING number when I called the ANI test. Both lines are billed to the same number. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@Neon.stanford.edu) [Moderator's Note: My two lines are both BILLED on the first line. I get one bill each month, with long distance charges from the second line appended on a separate page. When I tried the ANI number just now from the second line, it read me the second, or calling number. Maybe 'billing number' is a local matter, depending on how your local telco chooses to handle it. Maybe in my case I have two 'billing numbers' with both bills shown on one monthly statement. I think there are some semantics used here to define 'billing' and 'calling' numbers. PAT]