----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Thomas" <mike@mtcc.com>
On 7/15/19 12:07 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
Yes, of course we sent out calls with "spoofed" CNID.
But, even though only 2 or 3 or our 5 carriers* held *our* feet to the fire, we held the clients' feet to the fire, requiring them to prove to our satisfaction that they had adminstrative control over the numbers in question.
But it's the carrier's responsibility, properly, to do that work.
How do the clients prove that?
Do you know, I don't know; it was above my paygrade; the few times I stubbed a toe on it, I threw it over a wall. I presume that there was paperwork...
Way back when when we were working on mipv6 we had to work through a somewhat similar problem for handoffs. The ultimate answer was a return routability test: that is, if you can answer on the address you're trying to claim "ownership" for, it's good enough.
Might have been a handshake like that; I suspect it was mostly just "here's a picture of the client's phone bill".
But right you are, it's ultimately the carrier who needs to care about this problem at or nothing gets better.
Yup. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274