The RPID draft is expired; it was replaced by other headers/drafts. The old RPID drafts are at http://tools.ietf.org/wg/sip/draft-ietf-sip-privacy/
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Rashid Shakil > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 3:03 PM > To: [email protected]; Iñaki Baz Castillo > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Remote Party ID (RPID) > missing forRestricted call (caller ID hide) > > > Thanks ...That's what I am trying to figure out with > the carrier. Can you refer me a document\standard where this > behavior drafted ? > > > --- On Tue, 12/16/08, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Remote Party ID (RPID) > missing for Restricted call (caller ID hide) > To: [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 2:55 PM > > El Martes, 16 de Diciembre de 2008, Rashid Shakil escribió: > > I am wondering for restricted calls carrier have to send "CALLING > FROM" > > information (like RPID with Privacy=Full) or not or my > switch is being > > too picky to reject these calls ? > > CallerID information should be sent by the carriers which > route the call, even if the caller asked for privacy to his > provider (so the last carrier should take off the RPID/PAI > header and show "Anonymous" From to the called). > > The point here is why the wholesale VOIP provider is not > adding RPID/PAI header. > > -- > Iñaki Baz Castillo > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
