<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: An Extra &#8216;9&#8217; to your Mobile Number from January 2010? [11 Digit Mobile Number]</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pluggd.in/11-digit-mobile-number-india-297/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pluggd.in/11-digit-mobile-number-india-297/</link>
	<description>We Heart Startups!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:53:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: HimS</title>
		<link>http://www.pluggd.in/11-digit-mobile-number-india-297/comment-page-1/#comment-115326</link>
		<dc:creator>HimS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 10:46:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pluggd.in/11-digit-mobile-number-297/#comment-115326</guid>
		<description>Wouldnt it be better for everyone if the DoT simply dereserves the 92 (Tata), 93 ( Reliance), 94 (BSNL) number series. The current policy has reserved 30% of the available numbers in the 9x series for operators with less than 30% market share. In any case the number reservation plan is useless once we have number portability in place.

BTW, 80,81 &amp; 88 series are already operational (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_telephone_numbering_in_India)

The market share data mentioned above is rough approximation based on P 72 of the TRAI report: http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReadData/trai/upload/Reports/48/IndicatorReport1oct09.pdf)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wouldnt it be better for everyone if the DoT simply dereserves the 92 (Tata), 93 ( Reliance), 94 (BSNL) number series. The current policy has reserved 30% of the available numbers in the 9x series for operators with less than 30% market share. In any case the number reservation plan is useless once we have number portability in place.</p>
<p>BTW, 80,81 &amp; 88 series are already operational (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_telephone_numbering_in_India" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_telephone_numbering_in_India</a>)</p>
<p>The market share data mentioned above is rough approximation based on P 72 of the TRAI report: <a href="http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReadData/trai/upload/Reports/48/IndicatorReport1oct09.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReadData/trai/upload/Reports/48/IndicatorReport1oct09.pdf</a>)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kavin Kumar</title>
		<link>http://www.pluggd.in/11-digit-mobile-number-india-297/comment-page-1/#comment-115308</link>
		<dc:creator>Kavin Kumar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 05:45:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pluggd.in/11-digit-mobile-number-297/#comment-115308</guid>
		<description>In consumers view, this is going to be quite annoying. 
Given the fact that we have got number portability, going for 8 series is better than moving to a 11 digit number. This would atleast save the unnecessary confusion to the 500 million population.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In consumers view, this is going to be quite annoying.<br />
Given the fact that we have got number portability, going for 8 series is better than moving to a 11 digit number. This would atleast save the unnecessary confusion to the 500 million population.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

