Hopefully Stir/Shaken will make this a moot point. Calvin, are you saying that a 608 is the recommended response for a call that is being rejected due to S/S attestation or CVT reasons?

~Glen

On 2/16/2021 8:19 AM, Calvin Ellison wrote:
Today we received a notice from one of our underlying carriers that included the following statement:

* If a customer spoofs an ANI that they do not own, the clec's can forward to call to a voiceless Voicemail which appears to be FAS.


Is there any legal device that actually supports this practice? I'm looking for a specific statute, FCC rule, precedent in a judicial ruling, or the like.

The FCC has ruled that the SIP 608 response code is to be used for signaling when a call is rejected. I doubt the FCC or FTC has ruled that terminating carriers are permitted to cause loss of trust and revenue between upstream intermediate and originating carriers.


Regards,

Calvin Ellison
Systems Architect
[email protected]
+1 (213) 285-0555

-----------------------------------------------
voxox.com 
5825 Oberlin Drive, Suite 5
San Diego, CA 92121

Voxox

_______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

-- 
Glen Gerhard
[email protected]
858.324.4536

Cognexus, LLC
7891 Avenida Kirjah
San Diego, CA 92037
_______________________________________________
VoiceOps mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

Reply via email to