Why would XO do That?

ATL has been a RespOrg since 1993 and works with every carrier.  After fifteen years of experience, carriers know they can rely on ATL to properly set-up their records and never risk our reputation of integrity by recommending carriers, taking money from carriers, or changing records for our own use.

Why then, would XO Communications suddenly decide to change their policy to prevent their customers and prospects from using ATL?  Here are the reasons in their words, and my responses to them:

• XO nor GC have the control or knowledge of what traffic is being sent to us.

This is not true.  A toll free number doesn’t work unless the carrier puts the terminating number into their switch, so calls can’t complete unless the carrier knows about it.  I wonder how Global Crossing feels about being included in XO’s statement.  ATL is RespOrg for tens of thousands of GC numbers and has had a great relationship with the company back to when it was Allnet.

• ATL is not a customer of XO; XO will have no recourse to pursue any compensation from traffic sent to XO under the ATL RESPORG ID

ATL is not a customer of any of the carriers.  That’s the point of being an independent RespOrg.  The carrier’s contract is with their customer.  If they want recourse they simply add that to the form they already use for 3^rd party RespOrgs.  Then, if their customer chooses to reroute traffic in a way that affects XOs cost, the customer pays the difference plus a premium. 

• Because ATL is not a customer of XO’s, XO would need to work with “Customer” (I consider the customer involved in this propriety)  to remove ATL unwanted traffic, technical issues or disputes regarding billing; resolution MTTR would be jeopardized

I don’t know what MTTR is, but she is absolutely right, she would have to work with her customer and apparently she still doesn’t understand what an independent RespOrg is because there is no ATL traffic.

• “Customer” being XO’s customers would need to be assigned as having authority for ATL RESPORG ID in order to avoid slamming issues or disputes

Since XO would not be doing the porting I don’t know where she was going with this.

I tell my customers that since RespOrg is just a cost, there is only one reason why a carrier would not want their customer to use an independent – they are not confident enough about their service and rates to allow the customer easy control.  Since, by FCC rule, the choice of RespOrg belongs to the end user, this is really just a refusal to carry the traffic for their customer.

Do you have a comment?