Talk:Mobile network codes in ITU region 7xx (South America)

Table formatting

See Talk:Mobile country code for guidelines on formatting the tables as well as the reasoning behind them and discussions about the formatting. Drahtlos (talk) 18:14, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Brazil table

Hello @Daviddiniz: some comments on your edits to the Brazil table (also see Talk:Mobile country code):

• The table formatting should be kept consistent between countries.
• It is better to keep one line per MNC, and sort the MNCs in numerical order. Otherwise it gets hard to find MNCs, especially in countries with many MNCs.
• MNCs no longer in use should not be deleted but rather marked "Not operational". Sometimes readers want to find inactive MNCs as well.
• References should not be deleted, unless they are replaced by better ones.
• For operator without their own RAN, MVNO should be placed in the Bands column, rather than listing all the bands of operators that they roam on (duplication and also hard to maintain). A note about roaming partners in References and notes is sufficient.

For these reasons I will undo your changes. Drahtlos (talk) 18:14, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Mobile Network Codes in ITU region 2xx (Europe) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:36, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

MCC/MNC 708-02

@Captain.P.Gums: An MNC should be added to the tables only if the MNC is assigned by the regulatory agency or actually used by a mobile network. If some software does not handle 3-digit MNCs with a leading 0 correctly then this is not a reason to add a workaround in the tables here. Drahtlos (talk) 02:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

It *is* used by the mobile network.

We have software which relies on the information in this table. We have seen traffic from Tigo reporting as 708/02 and 708/002.

Because they are distinct entries, and 708:002 and 708:02 are not the same entry (even though in this situation they are the same operator).

We can't randomly put a leading zero in front of any 2 digit MNCs to make them 3 digits, as there's no guarantee that for another operator that MCC:MN and MCC:0MN are the same operator. Captain.P.Gums (talk) 11:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

@Captain.P.Gums: That makes it clearer. If both are used then we should list them both. Can you say where the 2-digit MNC shows up? In SS7 traces? On the air interface? If on the air interface then can you narrow it down (e.g. only on older GSM base stations)? Drahtlos (talk) 20:44, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Sadly I'm not able to tell you exactly how, but the handset (the source of the data) itself was reporting as being connected to 708:02. It was a 3G (UTRAN) cell, and the date was Fri Aug 02 2024 Captain.P.Gums (talk) 08:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Could this be a bug in a specific handset or handset firmware revision, considering that it is an MNC starting with "0"? Did you see 708-02 from more than one handset? Did you see 708-002 reported by the same handset that reported 708-02? Drahtlos (talk) 21:05, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

We saw so little data from that handset (a single message) I don't know if it ever reported 002. Sorry. Captain.P.Gums (talk) 12:58, 24 October 2024 (UTC)