glehman

I'm a little bit clueless here. I mostly do moves adds and changes, don't get much into the routes and all that fun stuff. So, I'll just post the email I sent to a tech, like I sent it. Perhaps someone out there can help me make some sense of it?

Here it is...
Here is my dilemma:

We have 2 trunk groups. One which goes through CO1 with 5 PRIs and
one which goes through CO2 with 1 PRI. Any call which goes through
the building and out either route shows 769-xxxx as the Caller ID. Calls
going out the CO1 route are identified as 769-xxxx to which Eatel
was instructed to require an LD auth code on. Calls going out the =
Goodwood PRI are identified as 923-xxxx which Eatel was instructed to not require an LD auth code on. BellSouth tells me that calls coming over the CO2 PRI should show 923-xxxx as the caller ID unless they are coming from 923-1xxx, which would get passed through, as it is in the screening table; however, this cannot be true because all calls coming over the CO2 PRI show 769-xxxx. It is my contention that the number the line identifies itself as and the number passed along as Caller ID are =
separate. I was assured by BellSouth that they are not.

That's where we stand now, but, where is this going?

We are dropping the CO2 PRI and going with the 5 CO1 PRIs. =
Jim suggested that we take 2 channels from each PRI create a =
separate route for them and have BellSouth give them an identifying =
number, which we could pass to Eatel as not requiring an LD code. To this BellSouth responded, "BellSouth can set up multiple B Channel routes if that is what you would like, but we can not assign numbers to individual
channels. The Central Office switch is a Nortel DMS and Nortel does NOT
support a span lower than a T1 or 23 B Channels." I called BellSouth and =
asked what I could do, to which they suggested that I have them set up =
their switch to take the numbers we designate to each extension and pass =
them through. Or, we could put some numbers in the screening table which =
could be changed to another number we designate, say 999-9999. If the =
number is not in the screening table it changes to the default 769-xxxx =
and if attempting to dial long distance would require an auth code. If =
the number were in the screening table (they say we can only have 29, =
which will not work for us, as we have over 30 faxes), then it would be =
changed to the other designated number, 999-9999, and when that hit Eatel =
no auth code would be required, as we would have set that up with Eatel =
beforehand.

So, yeah, argh.

All we want to be able to do is have all of the extensions we call from =
show 769-xxxx as the caller ID. We want the fax machines or other =
extensions we designate to be able to call long distance without requiring =
a long distance code, everything else should require a code. It is =
Donna's assertion that we set up the caller ID with BellSouth. Do you =
have any ideas or suggestions? I'd like to be able to control whether or =
not a call will require an LD auth code; this is where Jim decided a =
second route would be beneficial. BellSouth suggests dividing into 2 =
routes is bad... Can you help?

Any ideas?