FCC: rulemaking on STIR/SHAKEN and Caller ID Authentication

Brandon Svec bsvec at teamonesolutions.com
Thu Sep 10 20:56:00 UTC 2020

99%?  If a phone number was used than the PSTN was used. The fact that SIP
is involved in part or all of the call path is not very relevant except for
peer-to-peer stuff like whatsapp, skype, signal, telegram, etc. (and even
those don't use SIP, but I think you meant voip more than SIP specifically)
Even some of those can use e.164 for part or all of the path.

I do believe that if the robo call/scam/fraudulent call issue does not get
resolved people may eventually start to give up and just use apps like
that.  Many probably have already.

*Brandon Svec*

*15106862204 <15106862204> voice|sms**teamonesolutions.com

On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 1:11 PM Michael Thomas <mike at mtcc.com> wrote:

> On 9/10/20 9:49 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
> >
> > At this month's FCC rulemaking meeting, it will consider
> >
> >
> https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-announces-tentative-agenda-september-open-meeting-6
> >
> >
> > Promoting Caller ID Authentication to Combat Spoofed Robocalls – The
> > Commission will consider a Report and Order that would continue its
> > work to implement the TRACED Act and promote the deployment of caller
> > ID authentication technology to combat spoofed robocalls.
> > (WC Docket No. 17-97)
> So I have a question: what percentage of traffic in the US is really
> coming from the legacy PSTN? My understanding is that it's pretty low
> these days.
> If that's true, it seems to me that this is a SIP problem, not an e.164
> problem.
> Mike
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20200910/598a2029/attachment.html>

More information about the NANOG mailing list