to add some additional thoughts... >> Yes, this is my question. Would DUNDi be more successful in public >> networks >> if there were technical means to enforce the obligations of a peering >> agreement, such as honest representation of the numbers a DUNDi >> entity can >> terminate and inter-carrier compensation. > > I don't see a reason it would be less successful, and it does open the > door to the possibility of increased success. > > Since we already discussed using legal means of enforcement, what > about if the protocol offered tracability of all exchanges, so that at > the very least an IP address in known? In general this is easier to > perform than lockdown (which will require the tracability anyway).
It seems to me an IP might be too little to go on. I suppose an X.509 encryption layer in the protocol would remove any ambiguity, but then we forfeit some of the distributed nature of the system because we would require a certificate authority. But without a central authority of some sort, it's hard to see how we could eliminate error or fraud by purely technical means. Might be interesting to get a number of entities with SS7 presence to validate possibly on an ongoing basis. I hate centralized, but... -Anders _______________________________________________ Dundi mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/dundi
