On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 11:00:22PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote: > > Unless I'm very much mistaken, ANI is a *delivery method*. BTN is a > > *label for a subscriber service* which is *delivered via* ANI. > > ANI is an informational element, how that is transmitted would rely on > the delivery method. > > > So your assertion doesn't actually make a lot of sense. > > It makes sense if you properly understand that ANI is information, a > phone number for example, and not a delivery method, sip for example.
Do you have a pointer to a data dictionary that lists CLID, ANI, and BTN as three separate ISUP elements? > > I don't see that my assertion there was at all difficult to understand. > > no its not difficult to understand, its just based on flawed information > as a result its not accurate. ANI is not a delivery method, its an > informational element. That little difference changes a lot in what you > claimed, such as below. Citation. Please. > > > Case and point the federal government will often send calls out onto the > > > pstn with a ani and caller id of 0000000000, which is less than valid. > > > This disproves assertions that it has to point somewhere valid. > > > > Nope, it proves that US federal government agencies often break (or, > > less often, are exempt from) lots of laws and regulations, often to the > > detriment of precisely the people those laws were designed to protect. > > > > And the common usage is "case in point" > > Uhh, you forgot to quote where you said it was required to point > somewhere valid for the call to go through, which is false it does not. <sigh> The standard operation of the elements in the PSTN is such that if a valid ANI is not transmitted along with every call, *some element somewhere* is going to have a heart attack of one scale or another. Better? > You have changed from saying its required to point somewhere valid for > the call to route to saying that its a delivery method as opposed to an > informational element. I would suggest that you stop changing your > argument from one thing to another when assertions such as those are > challenged. It makes you look like you dont know what you are talking > about, and given that this is a business list it may make it difficult > for you to market yourself should you desire to do that. Just a little > friendly advice, take it or leave it. *Exactly* what I said was this: > When calls are dumped into the PSTN, they *have* to have valid ANI; > too much of the semantics of the entire remainder of the PSTN depends > on it. > If that impairs the ability of some to interact with subscribers to the > PSTN, then they'll have to find another way to cope with it. If you > mean what I think you mean by "aggregators" -- intermediate carriers > who bridge traffic from smaller edge providers to the PSTN, then your > responsiblity is to require that of your edge providers by contracts > with teeth. > But there has to be an ANI, and it has to point somewhere valid -- even > if it's the edge provider itself as proxy for the end sub. You are alleging that I said (or even implied) that the call would not complete if valid ANI wasn't included; clearly, I did not say that. > Thanks for correcting me on case in point vs case and point. I will be > sure to credit you for that, you are correct in that singular point, it > is case in point. My apologies for mistyping a common phrase. Well, dammit, Bret... :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink [EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274 Those who cast the vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything. -- (Joseph Stalin) _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz