Jay R. Ashworth
2006-Oct-24 11:58 UTC
[asterisk-users] "Fixing the Caller-ID Problem", by John Todd for O'ReillyNet
This seems like a piece members of this list would find interesting... == There is growing concern over the interaction of VoIP systems with the legacy PSTN, and the transmission of caller identity data--most notably, Caller ID on the PSTN. It is not always possible, or obvious how, to handle Caller ID data when moving to or from VoIP and the PSTN networks. There are even business models predicated on the ability of Caller ID to be transmitted to the PSTN with a value that is not "expected"; call centers are an obvious example, where customer-support staff make outbound calls with a Caller ID that may be from one of many possible clients. More troubling is the possibility that Caller ID may be used to trick unsuspecting call recipients into certain actions or beliefs, and it is this concern that's currently creating a legislative threat I believe must be averted. ... Congress is currently considering legislation titled The Truth in Caller ID Act, which certainly sounds noble. Who doesn't want correct Caller ID when receiving a call? The truth is that this bill is redundant--the Wire Fraud Act already covers this issue, and adding more wording seems to be merely a re-statement of a certain circumstance or type of Wire Fraud. While the wording of this legislation does not effectively change the amount of power a prosecutor currently has, I believe it will certainly create confusion and fear in the technical and investment community because of the uncertainty it promotes. It's like saying, "I want you to not break the speeding laws AND I want you to not go over the speed limit!" A legal staff could spend a week--at $200 an hour--explaining that to a CEO, despite the consistency. == http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/etel/2006/10/18/solving-the-caller-id-problem.html Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "That's women for you; you divorce them, and 10 years later, they stop having sex with you." -- Jennifer Crusie; _Fast_Women_
Jay R. Ashworth
2006-Oct-24 12:13 UTC
[asterisk-users] "Fixing the Caller-ID Problem", by John Todd for O'ReillyNet
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 02:57:38PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:> This seems like a piece members of this list would find interesting...Further down, he notes: The PSTN cannot turn on a dime and restrict ANI/CLID from many clients using "whitelist" filters. Caller ID manipulation is used too widely for completely legitimate purposes, and any firm providing interconnection will almost always ask for a removal of the ingress filter when sending calls to another carrier. I believe that a "check-ahead database" that is consulted before call completion at any/every border is unworkable as a matter of cost and willpower. with which I disagree. In the current regulatory environment, the only thing they really have handle on is calls which transit the PSTN, and there are *already* rules which restrict what CNID may be transmitted across the PSTN by a LEC or IXC. Given that framework, my personal viewpoint is that that's *exactly* the situation, and that since most switches have that code in them already, though sometimes they don't bother to enable it, that this shouldn't be nearly as big a deal as he says it is. All they should have to do is instrument their ISDN trunks to see which ones are having customer-provided CNID sent down them, and clean up their datafill before enabling the restriction code that's already there. It's all about they money, though: if *every* LEC and IXC taking direct digital drops doesn't all force it at the same time, there will be scads of carrier changes. So perhaps legislation -- or more properly, enforcement of the current rules -- is called for. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "That's women for you; you divorce them, and 10 years later, they stop having sex with you." -- Jennifer Crusie; _Fast_Women_
Ejay Hire
2006-Oct-26 07:46 UTC
[asterisk-users] "Fixing the Caller-ID Problem", by John Todd for O'ReillyNet
I have a couple of useful bits that could be tacked on to this.. 1. Telcos required to offer the ability to set the outbound caller id. 2. Telcos required to offer the ability to write to the CNAM database, in near-real or short time. 3. Telcos required to forward the ANI you provide to the 911 wire center, instead of the trunk number of a PRI. -Ejay -----Original Message----- From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Jay R. Ashworth Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 1:58 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: [asterisk-users] "Fixing the Caller-ID Problem",by John Todd for O'ReillyNet This seems like a piece members of this list would find interesting... == There is growing concern over the interaction of VoIP systems with the legacy PSTN, and the transmission of caller identity data--most notably, Caller ID on the PSTN. It is not always possible, or obvious how, to handle Caller ID data when moving to or from VoIP and the PSTN networks. There are even business models predicated on the ability of Caller ID to be transmitted to the PSTN with a value that is not "expected"; call centers are an obvious example, where customer-support staff make outbound calls with a Caller ID that may be from one of many possible clients. More troubling is the possibility that Caller ID may be used to trick unsuspecting call recipients into certain actions or beliefs, and it is this concern that's currently creating a legislative threat I believe must be averted. ... Congress is currently considering legislation titled The Truth in Caller ID Act, which certainly sounds noble. Who doesn't want correct Caller ID when receiving a call? The truth is that this bill is redundant--the Wire Fraud Act already covers this issue, and adding more wording seems to be merely a re-statement of a certain circumstance or type of Wire Fraud. While the wording of this legislation does not effectively change the amount of power a prosecutor currently has, I believe it will certainly create confusion and fear in the technical and investment community because of the uncertainty it promotes. It's like saying, "I want you to not break the speeding laws AND I want you to not go over the speed limit!" A legal staff could spend a week--at $200 an hour--explaining that to a CEO, despite the consistency. == http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/etel/2006/10/18/solving-the-caller-id-proble m.html Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "That's women for you; you divorce them, and 10 years later, they stop having sex with you." -- Jennifer Crusie; _Fast_Women_ _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Tomislav Parčina
2006-Oct-27 01:10 UTC
[asterisk-users] Re: "Fixing the Caller-ID Problem", by John Todd for O'ReillyNet
In article <45419048.5000902@themarvins.org>, jm-asterisk@themarvins.org says...> For my home Asterisk setup I have a single PSTN line, and then I use a > variety of different voip providers. I use two different providers for > my DID's (one toll free, and one normal). I use yet a different provider > for terminating outgoing calls. > > So, when making an outgoing call via voip, what number should I use to > identify myself? I currently use the number of my PSTN line, since that > is our "public" inbound number.Hi John! I have same situation, and I certainly agree about everything you said. -- Tomislav Par?ina Lama Computers Split Stinice 12, 21000 Split Tel.: +385(21)270248 Mob.: +385(91)1212148 SIP: tomo@sip.lama.hr e-mail: tparcina#lama.hr http://www.lama.hr