That seems actually hard to implement because it adds a layer to all calls
at the proxy. Have you looked at the sipvicious scripts yet that allow it to
be recognized and killed?

On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Matt White <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes, that is exactly the scenario I'm describing.
>
> This customer actually already has a call block feature with their
> ITSP...ie to block anonymous calls and a few others.   But the calls did not
> cease.  When we looked into it the calls where not coming in via the SIP
> trunk but directly to port 5060 from sip servers in another country.
>
> So it seems reasonable to me that a feature that simply says "do not accept
> calls not from my itsp" would be one method to help control this.
>
>
>
> -M
>
>
> >>> "Todd Hodgen" 08/07/10 12:47 PM >>>
>
>  There is an analogy that works well here.  Today, you can call any
> telephone number you want, ring the phone and hang up.   This isn’t much
> different, a user can use sip to call directly into a sip phone.  And, as
> kids I think many of us can recall playing pranks on people over the phone –
> caller ID took the fun out of that.  L
>
>
>
> Somebody ringing my PSTN phone can ring the phone, but they can’t call out
> on it.   Similarly, someone getting a two way audio path up with a SIP
> phone, can just do that, but can’t call out.
>
>
>
> What I think Matt is proposing is a solution that says if you are calling
> one of the devices on my network, you need to have my permission to do so.
> Similar products have come on the market for the PSTN due to unsolicited
> calling that requires you to authenticate you are approved to call that PSTN
> number, before it would ring the telephone at the residence.  Call blockers
> are what many call them.  Example item -
> http://www.amazon.com/Caller-Phone-Ring-Control-Completed/dp/B0007R5TQ6/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1281199141&sr=8-10
>
>
>
> If I’m understanding Matt correctly, he is suggesting a method of turning
> off the ability to ring a phone on your network randomly from the outside,
> or a method similar to the device that kept nuisance calls out.  To me it is
> legitimate, as the last thing any business wants is some 10 year old hacker
> call all of the phones on the network playing “phone ring ditch”.   I agree
> with Matt, this isn’t a protocol issue, but a method of controlling if each
> individual phone will participate in that portion of the protocol, or deny
> it explicitly.   A URI access list comes to mind as well, saying I will
> accept incoming URI calls if they come from these domains, or these ranges
> of IP addresses.  You could bounce unwanted URI calls to a common extension
> that had an announcement of a method to get permission to URL call into the
> system also.
>
>
>
> I think he brings up an excellent point that I hadn’t considered.  I’m sure
> someday I am going to get a call from a customer that they are getting prank
> calls that they want to end.  Geez.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sipx-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>



-- 
======================
Tony Graziano, Manager
Telephone: 434.984.8430
sip: [email protected]
Fax: 434.984.8431

Email: [email protected]

LAN/Telephony/Security and Control Systems Helpdesk:
Telephone: 434.984.8426
sip: [email protected]
Fax: 434.984.8427

Helpdesk Contract Customers:
http://www.myitdepartment.net/gethelp/

Why do mathematicians always confuse Halloween and Christmas?
Because 31 Oct = 25 Dec.
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/

Reply via email to