[Discuss] CU attempts to end robocalls [OT]

[gmongardi at napc.com (Grant Mongardi)]

I always thought this would be simple for the major carriers with with
network-transfer arrangements. For example if Verizon passes a call from
inside it's network to AT&T, then it must certify the origin of the call
(CA? some other certificate or signature?). The certification would have
some means of verification via Verizon. If Verizon passes too many
offending calls to AT&T then AT&T has some recourse (blocking all
inter-network traffic, marking calls as SPAM, only allowing
customer-authorized calls through). So if you were a smaller carrier, or a
non-US carrier, or a VOIP carrier you would either be quickly out of
business or else be very diligent in not allowing robo-callers on your
network. Each carrier would implement some sort of simple reporting
mechanism that would allow a *00 sort of 'call-was-spam' reporting. This
would mean less crap traffic for the carriers and happier customers.

I can't imagine it's that difficult to do. But they get revenue from those
calls even if they don't originate on their network. It's traffic and
someone pays for it.

Grant M.

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Daniel Barrett <dbarrett at blazemonger.com>
wrote:

> On December 7, 2015, Daniel C. wrote:
> >How would such filtering tools work, and how effective would they likely
> be?
>
> I have read (but don't remember where) that the signature of these
> types of calls, with their fake caller ID and international origin, is
> detectable.
>
> --
> Dan Barrett
> dbarrett at blazemonger.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 

Grant Mongardi
Senior Systems Engineer
NAPC
gmongardi at napc.comhttp://www.napc.com/blog.napc.com
781.894.3114 phone
781.894.3997 fax

NAPC | technology matters