FCC: rulemaking on STIR/SHAKEN and Caller ID Authentication

Michael Thomas mike at mtcc.com
Thu Sep 10 23:24:38 UTC 2020

On 9/10/20 1:56 PM, Brandon Svec wrote:
> 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.

We're probably not communicating because lots of carriers are using 
VoLTE which SIP end to end, so that is a lot more that 1%. I know that 
my local telco uses SIP over fiber at the little pedestal which 
terminates POTS and never touches SS7 anything from what I can tell. 
e.164 addresses are a relic of legacy telephony signalling, even if 
they're still used to make the user part of a From: address.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20200910/b363f7b4/attachment.html>

More information about the NANOG mailing list