Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

New PRL 50233

Tags:
  • Verizon
  • Internet Service Providers
Last response: in Network Providers
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 11:04:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

PRL 50233 has been released and here are the changes compared to PRL
50210. Some of the details of the SIDs were obtained from
www.justalurker.com and www.mountainwireless.com and
http://www.ifast.org/SIDtables.htm
Some changes in priority and changes from A to D/A may not be noted
along with any other changes that I may have missed.

This is really a rather minor change, some changes in priority, a
dropped Sprint area, and a few other minor changes.

VZW = Verizon native area - no triangle
FRM = Free Roam/Extended Network - no triangle
FRL = Free Roam/Extended Network Limited - flashing triangle
RM = Roaming - solid triangle
NEG = Negative Entry - will not roam on this provider
A = Analog Only
D/A = Digital/Analog
D = Digital Only
PCS = PCS

--------------------------------------------------------
The following areas changed from FRM to VZW.
--------------------------------------------------------
1080 D/A Verizon Wireless (formerly El Dorado Cellular d/b/a
Mountain Cellular)
CMA346B California 11 - El Dorado

--------------------------------------------------------
The following areas changed from RM to FRL.
--------------------------------------------------------
1868 D/A Peoples Wireless
CMA658B Texas 7 - Fannin

-------------------------------------------
The following FRM area was dropped
-------------------------------------------
4120 PCS Sprint PCS
SCAN 500B 575B 650B 425B
MTA007 Dallas, TX-LA-AR-OK-NM

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following FRM SID split its D/A entry into a [D] and (A) and
priority changes
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1280 [D](A) and PCS Bluegrass Cellular
CMA445B Kentucky 3 - Meade
CMA446B Kentucky 4 - Spencer
CMA447B Kentucky 5 - Barren

-------------------------------------------
The following VZW SID moved down in the PRL
-------------------------------------------
262 D/A Sagebrush Cellular
CMA525B Montana 3 - Phillips
CMA526B Montana 4 - Daniels
Triangle Communication Systems
CMA524B Montana 2 - Toole
CMA525B Montana 3 - Phillips
Verizon Wireless
CMA268B Billings, MT
CMA297B Great Falls, MT
CMA523B Montana 1 - Lincoln
CMA524B Montana 2 - Toole
CMA526B Montana 4 - Daniels
CMA527B Montana 5 - Mineral
CMA528B Montana 6 - Deer Lodge
CMA529B Montana 7 - Fergus
CMA530B Montana 8 - Beaverhead
CMA531B Montana 9 - Carbon
CMA532B Montana 10 - Prairie

-------------------------------------------
The following RM SID moved up in the PRL
-------------------------------------------
3102 (A) Mid-Rivers Cellular
CMA525B Montana 3 - Phillips
CMA526B Montana 4 - Daniels
CMA532B Montana 10 - Prairie


Rich

More about : prl 50233

Anonymous
December 13, 2004 3:07:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Bill Radio" <Wireless@MountainWirelessNOSPAN.com> wrote in message
news:10rqefljcl80tb7@corp.supernews.com...
> Clay,
> It won't bother you unless you update your PRL. I still have Sprint as a
> roaming partner even though they removed it in our market 18 months ago.
>
> Bill Radio

Bill,
I'm still confused about this aspect of the PRL. I was thinking that I
would (could) be charged roaming in an area where a roaming partner had been
dropped, even though my older PRL indicated to the phone that it was still a
valid partner. Can you carify this for me?

Thanks,
Harold
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 9:37:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:07:25 GMT, "Harold Sherrill"

>Bill,
>I'm still confused about this aspect of the PRL. I was thinking that I
>would (could) be charged roaming in an area where a roaming partner had been
>dropped, even though my older PRL indicated to the phone that it was still a
>valid partner. Can you carify this for me?

As far as I can tell (and from what I've read here) this hasn't
occured YET, but it could at any time.

In some areas, Sprint has blocked the ability to roam on their network
(NYC is an example) if you're not a Sprint customer.

Remember, its not the roaming partners who determine whether or not
you're billed regular or roaming minutes - its Verizon who determines
this. But so far, they've "grandfathered" people who use a system
that's not on the recent PRL.

Bottom line, if it works for you, don't upgrade to another PRL unless
you have to.

Dave
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 4:46:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

x-no-archive:yes From: Diamond Dave:
"....In some areas, Sprint has blocked the ability to roam on their network
(NYC is an example) if you're not a Sprint customer. ..."

Not True. I regularly force my phone to Sprint in the NY/NNJ market, & am
billed as Plan mins, & IN as well.
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 12:44:49 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On 14 Dec 2004 13:46:47 GMT, advanspec@aol.com.ze (ADVANSPEC) wrote:

>x-no-archive:yes From: Diamond Dave:
>"....In some areas, Sprint has blocked the ability to roam on their network
>(NYC is an example) if you're not a Sprint customer. ..."
>
> Not True. I regularly force my phone to Sprint in the NY/NNJ market, & am
>billed as Plan mins, & IN as well.
>

That's odd. I was on Long Island in July and forced my phone to
Sprint. It would NOT let me place calls on their network.

Dave
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 3:29:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Harold,
So far, nobody contributing to this forum, including myself, has been
charged for roaming on Sprint PCS regardless of PRL. When VZ removes a
roaming partner from the PRL, they are attempting to reduce charges to THEM,
not trying to create new charges for YOU. No worry, mate.

-Bill

"Harold Sherrill" <hlsherrill@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1Cfvd.39523$bP2.18913@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
>
>> Bill,
> I'm still confused about this aspect of the PRL. I was thinking that I
> would (could) be charged roaming in an area where a roaming partner had
been
> dropped, even though my older PRL indicated to the phone that it was still
a
> valid partner. Can you carify this for me?
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 7:07:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <t79vr0p6c16sr65oo8kmk3336i0ecdokdf@4ax.com>,
Diamond Dave <dmine45.NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 14 Dec 2004 13:46:47 GMT, advanspec@aol.com.ze (ADVANSPEC) wrote:
>
>>x-no-archive:yes From: Diamond Dave:
>>"....In some areas, Sprint has blocked the ability to roam on their network
>>(NYC is an example) if you're not a Sprint customer. ..."
>>
>> Not True. I regularly force my phone to Sprint in the NY/NNJ market, & am
>>billed as Plan mins, & IN as well.
>
>That's odd. I was on Long Island in July and forced my phone to
>Sprint. It would NOT let me place calls on their network.

Sometimes it depends on what is your home system. I seem to recall that
a few years ago a poster in northern California, I believe, reported
that if he had a Verizon number from the same area where a particular
roaming partner was not in the PRL, call attempts (by switching A/B
appropriately) using that system were rejected, but a Verizon number
from another system could make calls.