IMO that is not sustainable without move notifications, sticky mac addressing on ports, locking patch cords, Kensington locks, phones that shock you when you try to unplug them etc.
That worked for us with key systems and PBXes because the wires determined the phone extension but that is probably not the case any longer.
Legality is going to depend on whatever is applicable, locally and upward, cannot really say. If your requirement is dispatchable address and on-site notification of the call, and the phones move within the same site, then, it is possibly legal, need to consult with appropriate counsel. From what I’d heard in the past, if you’re doing the best you can, there are notices, disclaimers, etc that you need to report when you move and take your phone with you, then perhaps that is the best you can do.
Other VoIP providers I have used in the past (consumer) have that in their requirements – you need to make sure your address is up to date for E911, but other than providing the facility, they do nothing else.
Adam Pawlowski
Network Engineer?| Network and Communication Services
University at Buffalo Information Technology (UBIT)
243 Computing Center, Buffalo, NY 14260
[cid:image001.png@01D9B62D.098F7380]
From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of El Pollo Loco
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2023 9:41 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] 1300 Node Culster
All,
I have an issue where the management is Manually Tracking Phones for E911.
They are updating Intrado Database Every Time a phone moves.
Issue is, phones move that are not reported.
1. Is this legal?
2. It doesn't sound like an acceptable solution to me.
Wanted to know your thoughts on this.
--
-Bryant
