I don't know if this will pass muster or not, and I don't think it will be too long before we can have full S/S up and running anyway, but we don't allow and have never allowed any of our customers to send a value for CLID that does not match a number linked to their account. Full stop. If they transmit a number that isn't actually provisioned on their account, we don't block the call, but the CLID gets forcibly overwritten with their BTN instead. We simply won't allow a CLID spoof.
Now, if they want to use us only for some of their term & have a bunch of numbers from another provider that they wish to source calls from through us, we will whitelist those numbers on their account on our side, but only after they have first supplied us with sufficient documentation / proof of ownership of those numbers. -- Nathan Anderson First Step Internet, LLC [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> From: VoiceOps [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Zilk, David Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 4:31 PM To: Voiceops.org Subject: [VoiceOps] Robocall Mitigation in lieu of STIR/SHAKEN The FCC is mandating that service providers must fully implement STIR/SHAKEN or certify that they are taking reasonable steps to avoid originating illegal robocall traffic in the portions of their network where STIR/SHAKEN can't be implemented. They have also declined to specify what those steps might be, though there may be more information available when they clarify the certification process by March 30th. What steps are people taking to meet this robocall mitigation requirement when STIR/SHAKEN is not able to be implemented? David
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
