Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[Matthew Loraditch]

Was mostly curious and had the RAM, couldn’t get it working and documentation 
is sparse to put it mildly so left it alone for now.


Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
From: Anthony Holloway 
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 4:44 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch 
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[EXTERNAL]

No, good point.  I'm on the 100 Agent OVA without cloud support, because, well, 
I don't have a need for that.  Seems to me like Cisco made a goof alerting on a 
service which cannot start, and will not start, due to my use of the system.  
I'll tell the TAC engineer this.  Did you configure the cloud connect?  If so, 
what are you using it for.

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 2:50 PM Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:
Didn’t think about that….

It’s running. Curious did you put enough RAM on for the cloud stuff to run? I’m 
wondering if it’s part of that. Mine has the RAM for the cloud services.


Matthew Loraditch​
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com
 |
e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
[Helion Technologies]
[Facebook]
[Twitter]
[LinkedIn]
From: Anthony Holloway 
mailto:avholloway%2bcisco-v...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 3:45 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>>
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[EXTERNAL]

Thanks for the reply Matt.  You could just use the web interface to see if it's 
running or not.  It's not in CCX Seviceability, just plain Seviceability, under 
Network Services.

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 2:43 PM Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:
If I could get RTMT to load on my one 12.5 install I’d let you know… some crazy 
java error but haven’t had time to deal with TAC on it. Happens on multiple 
PCs, Fresh RTMT installs and all.



Matthew Loraditch​
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com
 |
e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
[Helion Technologies]
[Facebook]
[Twitter]
[LinkedIn]
From: cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> 
On Behalf Of Anthony Holloway
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 3:27 PM
To: Cisco VoIP Group 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[EXTERNAL]

Anyone else running UCCX 12.5(1) and their Docker Engine is Not Running?

It's being caught by CriticalServicesDown and SyslogSeverityMatchFound and 
sending a lot of emails to tech support.

TAC is telling me the Docker Engine is not a UCCX service, so likely just some 
bloat on the UCOS/VOS image, however, that doesn't solve the problem of the 
alerts which are being sent.

I've asked for BU escalation at this point, and am waiting to hear back, but in 
the meantime, it would be good to know if others have already been down this 
path, or simply to put this information out there, for when you deploy your 
first UCCX 12.5(1).
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[Anthony Holloway]

No, good point.  I'm on the 100 Agent OVA without cloud support, because,
well, I don't have a need for that.  Seems to me like Cisco made a
goof alerting on a service which cannot start, and will not start, due to
my use of the system.  I'll tell the TAC engineer this.  Did you configure
the cloud connect?  If so, what are you using it for.

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 2:50 PM Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> Didn’t think about that….
>
>
>
> It’s running. Curious did you put enough RAM on for the cloud stuff to
> run? I’m wondering if it’s part of that. Mine has the RAM for the cloud
> services.
>
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch​
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
> [image: Helion Technologies] 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
>
> *From:* Anthony Holloway 
> *Sent:* Friday, April 3, 2020 3:45 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch 
> *Cc:* Cisco VoIP Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running
>
>
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> Thanks for the reply Matt.  You could just use the web interface to see if
> it's running or not.  It's not in CCX Seviceability, just plain
> Seviceability, under Network Services.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 2:43 PM Matthew Loraditch <
> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
> If I could get RTMT to load on my one 12.5 install I’d let you know… some
> crazy java error but haven’t had time to deal with TAC on it. Happens on
> multiple PCs, Fresh RTMT installs and all.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Loraditch**​*
>
> *Sr. Network Engineer*
>
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com* 
>
>  |
>
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
>
> [image: Helion Technologies] 
>
> [image: Facebook] 
>
> [image: Twitter] 
>
> [image: LinkedIn] 
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Anthony
> Holloway
> *Sent:* Friday, April 3, 2020 3:27 PM
> *To:* Cisco VoIP Group 
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running
>
>
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> Anyone else running UCCX 12.5(1) and their Docker Engine is Not Running?
>
>
>
> It's being caught by CriticalServicesDown and SyslogSeverityMatchFound and
> sending a lot of emails to tech support.
>
>
>
> TAC is telling me the Docker Engine is not a UCCX service, so likely just
> some bloat on the UCOS/VOS image, however, that doesn't solve the problem
> of the alerts which are being sent.
>
>
>
> I've asked for BU escalation at this point, and am waiting to hear back,
> but in the meantime, it would be good to know if others have already been
> down this path, or simply to put this information out there, for when you
> deploy your first UCCX 12.5(1).
>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

Since this is slightly related, if you’re having issues with the CNAM database, 
these guys can help.

https://fixcallerid.com/

We had issues surrounding calling name ID and they’re were able to resolve 
them. And set up monitoring.

We never really found the source, but if it comes up again, we’ll catch it and 
may be able to back trace.



Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 3, 2020, at 2:26 PM, Ryan Huff 
mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote:

That is correct, however, your carrier has far more capabilities to compel 
other carrier than you do. Just calling 1-800–my-carrier and opening a support 
ticket probably won’t cut it. It’s a good and likely necessary start, but 
ultimately, in my experience, things like this with carriers only get solved 
when you get the money folks (account managers) involved.

No one in the carrier world cares about you till money is involved.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 3, 2020, at 13:58, JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>> wrote:


The problem is my carrier says they just deliver the call, its up to the called 
party end carrier to do the CID Name dip to deliver the CID name, City/State 
-or- in this case, substitute it with “Potential SPAM” and delver with the 
call. Which as I understand it, is correct information. On the end carrier side 
I have spoken with Verizon and AT and they basically said there is nothing 
they can do and pointed the blame to 3rd party app providers which as I said 
before, I know is not the truth based on my own personal experience. I guess 
I’ll try to get it escalated at Verizon. I think I have it about up as far as I 
can with AT Thanks for all the input from everyone.

Jason

From: Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 1:52 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

You need to become a thorn in the side of the AM for your upstream carrier. 
It’s a carrier -2- carrier fight at that point.
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 3, 2020, at 13:49, JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>> wrote:

Thanks for all the replies thus far. To answer a couple of the questions that 
have come up, we are using valid, working DID numbers that we own for all 
outbound Calling Number Masks. And none of the DIDs forward to other carriers, 
they are all pointed from the PSTN to our various gateways.

One thing that was mentioned is that a SPAM autodialer bot has at some point 
spoofed some of our numbers causing them to be flagged as SPAM which is 
certainly a possibility and nothing we can do about that. I regularly get calls 
even on my cell phone with the whole “hey I missed a call form you” from the 
caller and they get irritated when I tell them, sorry I did not call you.

I know there is nothing we can do from a configuration perspective. I was just 
hoping there was some managed whitelist these carriers used that I was unaware 
of. I know there are various 3rd party apps that do this but its definitely 
something being done at the carrier level as well because I frequently get 
these messages as well on a Verizon phone and I do not have and SPAM apps or 
subscriptions.

As more and more numbers are spoofed for SPAM calls I imagine at some point all 
numbers will be flagged at potential SPAM at this rate.

So unless I missed something, it sounds like there is really nothing we can do 
about it?

Jason



From: Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 12:30 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

I’ve seen this happen on my Verizon cell recently. Was very surprised, it was 
the first time I had ever seen it.

CNAME dips and presentation are done by the called party’s carrier, so there 
isn’t anything (functionally) the calling party’s PBX can do to influence that. 
CNAME inserts are done by your upstream carrier, so if something has actually 
been modified in the CNAME database for your ANI, your upstream carrier would 
have done it.

The only real actionable thing I think you can do (besides changing your ANI to 
something else), is what you’ve done. Call your upstream carrier and give them 
call samples where your call was delivered by the called party’s carrier and 
masked with incorrect ANI. Let the carriers fight each other on the carrier 
level.
Sent from my iPhone



On Apr 3, 2020, at 12:13, JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>> wrote:

More and more I have users reporting that their outbound 

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[Matthew Loraditch]

Didn’t think about that….

It’s running. Curious did you put enough RAM on for the cloud stuff to run? I’m 
wondering if it’s part of that. Mine has the RAM for the cloud services.


Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
From: Anthony Holloway 
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 3:45 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch 
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[EXTERNAL]

Thanks for the reply Matt.  You could just use the web interface to see if it's 
running or not.  It's not in CCX Seviceability, just plain Seviceability, under 
Network Services.

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 2:43 PM Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:
If I could get RTMT to load on my one 12.5 install I’d let you know… some crazy 
java error but haven’t had time to deal with TAC on it. Happens on multiple 
PCs, Fresh RTMT installs and all.



Matthew Loraditch​
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com
 |
e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
[Helion Technologies]
[Facebook]
[Twitter]
[LinkedIn]
From: cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> 
On Behalf Of Anthony Holloway
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 3:27 PM
To: Cisco VoIP Group 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[EXTERNAL]

Anyone else running UCCX 12.5(1) and their Docker Engine is Not Running?

It's being caught by CriticalServicesDown and SyslogSeverityMatchFound and 
sending a lot of emails to tech support.

TAC is telling me the Docker Engine is not a UCCX service, so likely just some 
bloat on the UCOS/VOS image, however, that doesn't solve the problem of the 
alerts which are being sent.

I've asked for BU escalation at this point, and am waiting to hear back, but in 
the meantime, it would be good to know if others have already been down this 
path, or simply to put this information out there, for when you deploy your 
first UCCX 12.5(1).
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[Anthony Holloway]

Thanks for the reply Matt.  You could just use the web interface to see if
it's running or not.  It's not in CCX Seviceability, just plain
Seviceability, under Network Services.

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 2:43 PM Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> If I could get RTMT to load on my one 12.5 install I’d let you know… some
> crazy java error but haven’t had time to deal with TAC on it. Happens on
> multiple PCs, Fresh RTMT installs and all.
>
>
>
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch​
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
> [image: Helion Technologies] 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Anthony
> Holloway
> *Sent:* Friday, April 3, 2020 3:27 PM
> *To:* Cisco VoIP Group 
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running
>
>
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> Anyone else running UCCX 12.5(1) and their Docker Engine is Not Running?
>
>
>
> It's being caught by CriticalServicesDown and SyslogSeverityMatchFound and
> sending a lot of emails to tech support.
>
>
>
> TAC is telling me the Docker Engine is not a UCCX service, so likely just
> some bloat on the UCOS/VOS image, however, that doesn't solve the problem
> of the alerts which are being sent.
>
>
>
> I've asked for BU escalation at this point, and am waiting to hear back,
> but in the meantime, it would be good to know if others have already been
> down this path, or simply to put this information out there, for when you
> deploy your first UCCX 12.5(1).
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[Matthew Loraditch]

If I could get RTMT to load on my one 12.5 install I’d let you know… some crazy 
java error but haven’t had time to deal with TAC on it. Happens on multiple 
PCs, Fresh RTMT installs and all.



Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Anthony 
Holloway
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 3:27 PM
To: Cisco VoIP Group 
Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[EXTERNAL]

Anyone else running UCCX 12.5(1) and their Docker Engine is Not Running?

It's being caught by CriticalServicesDown and SyslogSeverityMatchFound and 
sending a lot of emails to tech support.

TAC is telling me the Docker Engine is not a UCCX service, so likely just some 
bloat on the UCOS/VOS image, however, that doesn't solve the problem of the 
alerts which are being sent.

I've asked for BU escalation at this point, and am waiting to hear back, but in 
the meantime, it would be good to know if others have already been down this 
path, or simply to put this information out there, for when you deploy your 
first UCCX 12.5(1).
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[Anthony Holloway]

Anyone else running UCCX 12.5(1) and their Docker Engine is Not Running?

It's being caught by CriticalServicesDown and SyslogSeverityMatchFound and
sending a lot of emails to tech support.

TAC is telling me the Docker Engine is not a UCCX service, so likely just
some bloat on the UCOS/VOS image, however, that doesn't solve the problem
of the alerts which are being sent.

I've asked for BU escalation at this point, and am waiting to hear back,
but in the meantime, it would be good to know if others have already been
down this path, or simply to put this information out there, for when you
deploy your first UCCX 12.5(1).
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[Ryan Huff]

That is correct, however, your carrier has far more capabilities to compel 
other carrier than you do. Just calling 1-800–my-carrier and opening a support 
ticket probably won’t cut it. It’s a good and likely necessary start, but 
ultimately, in my experience, things like this with carriers only get solved 
when you get the money folks (account managers) involved.

No one in the carrier world cares about you till money is involved.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 3, 2020, at 13:58, JASON BURWELL  wrote:


The problem is my carrier says they just deliver the call, its up to the called 
party end carrier to do the CID Name dip to deliver the CID name, City/State 
-or- in this case, substitute it with “Potential SPAM” and delver with the 
call. Which as I understand it, is correct information. On the end carrier side 
I have spoken with Verizon and AT and they basically said there is nothing 
they can do and pointed the blame to 3rd party app providers which as I said 
before, I know is not the truth based on my own personal experience. I guess 
I’ll try to get it escalated at Verizon. I think I have it about up as far as I 
can with AT Thanks for all the input from everyone.

Jason

From: Ryan Huff 
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 1:52 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

You need to become a thorn in the side of the AM for your upstream carrier. 
It’s a carrier -2- carrier fight at that point.
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 3, 2020, at 13:49, JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>> wrote:

Thanks for all the replies thus far. To answer a couple of the questions that 
have come up, we are using valid, working DID numbers that we own for all 
outbound Calling Number Masks. And none of the DIDs forward to other carriers, 
they are all pointed from the PSTN to our various gateways.

One thing that was mentioned is that a SPAM autodialer bot has at some point 
spoofed some of our numbers causing them to be flagged as SPAM which is 
certainly a possibility and nothing we can do about that. I regularly get calls 
even on my cell phone with the whole “hey I missed a call form you” from the 
caller and they get irritated when I tell them, sorry I did not call you.

I know there is nothing we can do from a configuration perspective. I was just 
hoping there was some managed whitelist these carriers used that I was unaware 
of. I know there are various 3rd party apps that do this but its definitely 
something being done at the carrier level as well because I frequently get 
these messages as well on a Verizon phone and I do not have and SPAM apps or 
subscriptions.

As more and more numbers are spoofed for SPAM calls I imagine at some point all 
numbers will be flagged at potential SPAM at this rate.

So unless I missed something, it sounds like there is really nothing we can do 
about it?

Jason



From: Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 12:30 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

I’ve seen this happen on my Verizon cell recently. Was very surprised, it was 
the first time I had ever seen it.

CNAME dips and presentation are done by the called party’s carrier, so there 
isn’t anything (functionally) the calling party’s PBX can do to influence that. 
CNAME inserts are done by your upstream carrier, so if something has actually 
been modified in the CNAME database for your ANI, your upstream carrier would 
have done it.

The only real actionable thing I think you can do (besides changing your ANI to 
something else), is what you’ve done. Call your upstream carrier and give them 
call samples where your call was delivered by the called party’s carrier and 
masked with incorrect ANI. Let the carriers fight each other on the carrier 
level.
Sent from my iPhone



On Apr 3, 2020, at 12:13, JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>> wrote:

More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are showing 
as “Potential SPAM” on called party phones. Its causing some real problems 
because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases has 
requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don’t have 
voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not returning 
calls. I’m assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is being 
substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don’t do any 
telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with SPAM. 
I’ve reached out and received 

Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[Pawlowski, Adam]

My understanding of how it would work, would be that the carrier would assert 
you originated the traffic and were doing so legitimately, not that you had to 
do it yourself.

However, that of course leads to a whole other world of fraud attempts, if 
someone can bust in and use your system like a hat or use call forwarding.

My experience with CNAM troubles in the past has been that 95% of the time the 
customer misread it, it was generic with the name of a locale, or they were 
using a device with a contact list that had the wrong information in it. The 
other 5% is impossible as I’ve never had our carrier do anything other than say 
it is the other customer’s problem.  The carriers and I guess people in the 
know or connected in this business can work their contacts back channel but 
otherwise the customer seeing the bad information usually has to complain. 
Maybe others have better success.

I have had other people report names and various things have appeared on their 
mobile devices recently, which should a whole other mix of terrible if it’s not 
CNAM and populated from account data or something bizarre.

Adam

From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Lelio 
Fulgenzi
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 2:05 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch ; Ryan Huff 
; JASON BURWELL 
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

I specifically do this so we can do TEHO from our campuses. Some are serviced 
by other carriers.

We signed a waiver to do so.



From: cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> 
On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 1:56 PM
To: Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>>; JASON 
BURWELL mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

I’m wondering how this is all going work once shaken/stir are fully 
implemented. Are we going to have to prove we own numbers to other carriers? 
I’m sure many of us have DIDs outpulsed of alternative circuits at times.



Matthew Loraditch​

Sr. Network Engineer


p: 443.541.1518



w: www.heliontechnologies.com

 |

e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com


[Helion Technologies]


[Facebook]


[Twitter]


[LinkedIn]







From: cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> 
On Behalf Of Ryan Huff
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 1:52 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

[EXTERNAL]

You need to become a thorn in the side of the AM for your upstream carrier. 
It’s a carrier -2- carrier fight at that point.
Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 3, 2020, at 13:49, JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>> wrote:

Thanks for all the replies thus far. To answer a couple of the questions that 
have come up, we are using valid, working DID numbers that we own for all 
outbound Calling Number Masks. And none of the DIDs forward to other carriers, 
they are all pointed from the PSTN to our various gateways.

One thing that was mentioned is that a SPAM autodialer bot has at some point 
spoofed some of our numbers causing them to be flagged as SPAM which is 
certainly a possibility and nothing we can do about that. I regularly get calls 
even on my cell phone with the whole “hey I missed a call form you” from the 
caller and they get irritated when I tell them, sorry I did not call you.

I know there is nothing we can do from a configuration perspective. I was just 
hoping there was some managed whitelist these carriers used that I was unaware 
of. I know there are various 3rd party apps that do this but its definitely 
something being done at the carrier level as well because I frequently get 
these messages as well on a Verizon phone and I do not have and SPAM apps or 
subscriptions.

As more and more numbers are spoofed for SPAM calls I imagine at some point all 
numbers will be flagged at potential SPAM at this rate.

So unless I missed something, it sounds like there is really nothing we can do 
about it?

Jason



From: Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 12:30 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

I’ve 

Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

I specifically do this so we can do TEHO from our campuses. Some are serviced 
by other carriers.

We signed a waiver to do so.



From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Matthew 
Loraditch
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 1:56 PM
To: Ryan Huff ; JASON BURWELL 

Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

I’m wondering how this is all going work once shaken/stir are fully 
implemented. Are we going to have to prove we own numbers to other carriers? 
I’m sure many of us have DIDs outpulsed of alternative circuits at times.


Matthew Loraditch​
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com
 |
e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
[Helion Technologies]
[Facebook]
[Twitter]
[LinkedIn]
From: cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> 
On Behalf Of Ryan Huff
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 1:52 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

[EXTERNAL]

You need to become a thorn in the side of the AM for your upstream carrier. 
It’s a carrier -2- carrier fight at that point.
Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 3, 2020, at 13:49, JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>> wrote:

Thanks for all the replies thus far. To answer a couple of the questions that 
have come up, we are using valid, working DID numbers that we own for all 
outbound Calling Number Masks. And none of the DIDs forward to other carriers, 
they are all pointed from the PSTN to our various gateways.

One thing that was mentioned is that a SPAM autodialer bot has at some point 
spoofed some of our numbers causing them to be flagged as SPAM which is 
certainly a possibility and nothing we can do about that. I regularly get calls 
even on my cell phone with the whole “hey I missed a call form you” from the 
caller and they get irritated when I tell them, sorry I did not call you.

I know there is nothing we can do from a configuration perspective. I was just 
hoping there was some managed whitelist these carriers used that I was unaware 
of. I know there are various 3rd party apps that do this but its definitely 
something being done at the carrier level as well because I frequently get 
these messages as well on a Verizon phone and I do not have and SPAM apps or 
subscriptions.

As more and more numbers are spoofed for SPAM calls I imagine at some point all 
numbers will be flagged at potential SPAM at this rate.

So unless I missed something, it sounds like there is really nothing we can do 
about it?

Jason



From: Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 12:30 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

I’ve seen this happen on my Verizon cell recently. Was very surprised, it was 
the first time I had ever seen it.

CNAME dips and presentation are done by the called party’s carrier, so there 
isn’t anything (functionally) the calling party’s PBX can do to influence that. 
CNAME inserts are done by your upstream carrier, so if something has actually 
been modified in the CNAME database for your ANI, your upstream carrier would 
have done it.

The only real actionable thing I think you can do (besides changing your ANI to 
something else), is what you’ve done. Call your upstream carrier and give them 
call samples where your call was delivered by the called party’s carrier and 
masked with incorrect ANI. Let the carriers fight each other on the carrier 
level.
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 3, 2020, at 12:13, JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>> wrote:

More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are showing 
as “Potential SPAM” on called party phones. Its causing some real problems 
because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases has 
requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don’t have 
voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not returning 
calls. I’m assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is being 
substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don’t do any 
telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with SPAM. 
I’ve reached out and received little help from Verizon or AT 

Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip]

The problem is my carrier says they just deliver the call, its up to the called 
party end carrier to do the CID Name dip to deliver the CID name, City/State 
-or- in this case, substitute it with “Potential SPAM” and delver with the 
call. Which as I understand it, is correct information. On the end carrier side 
I have spoken with Verizon and AT and they basically said there is nothing 
they can do and pointed the blame to 3rd party app providers which as I said 
before, I know is not the truth based on my own personal experience. I guess 
I’ll try to get it escalated at Verizon. I think I have it about up as far as I 
can with AT Thanks for all the input from everyone.

Jason

From: Ryan Huff 
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 1:52 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

You need to become a thorn in the side of the AM for your upstream carrier. 
It’s a carrier -2- carrier fight at that point.
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 3, 2020, at 13:49, JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>> wrote:

Thanks for all the replies thus far. To answer a couple of the questions that 
have come up, we are using valid, working DID numbers that we own for all 
outbound Calling Number Masks. And none of the DIDs forward to other carriers, 
they are all pointed from the PSTN to our various gateways.

One thing that was mentioned is that a SPAM autodialer bot has at some point 
spoofed some of our numbers causing them to be flagged as SPAM which is 
certainly a possibility and nothing we can do about that. I regularly get calls 
even on my cell phone with the whole “hey I missed a call form you” from the 
caller and they get irritated when I tell them, sorry I did not call you.

I know there is nothing we can do from a configuration perspective. I was just 
hoping there was some managed whitelist these carriers used that I was unaware 
of. I know there are various 3rd party apps that do this but its definitely 
something being done at the carrier level as well because I frequently get 
these messages as well on a Verizon phone and I do not have and SPAM apps or 
subscriptions.

As more and more numbers are spoofed for SPAM calls I imagine at some point all 
numbers will be flagged at potential SPAM at this rate.

So unless I missed something, it sounds like there is really nothing we can do 
about it?

Jason



From: Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 12:30 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

I’ve seen this happen on my Verizon cell recently. Was very surprised, it was 
the first time I had ever seen it.

CNAME dips and presentation are done by the called party’s carrier, so there 
isn’t anything (functionally) the calling party’s PBX can do to influence that. 
CNAME inserts are done by your upstream carrier, so if something has actually 
been modified in the CNAME database for your ANI, your upstream carrier would 
have done it.

The only real actionable thing I think you can do (besides changing your ANI to 
something else), is what you’ve done. Call your upstream carrier and give them 
call samples where your call was delivered by the called party’s carrier and 
masked with incorrect ANI. Let the carriers fight each other on the carrier 
level.
Sent from my iPhone



On Apr 3, 2020, at 12:13, JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>> wrote:

More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are showing 
as “Potential SPAM” on called party phones. Its causing some real problems 
because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases has 
requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don’t have 
voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not returning 
calls. I’m assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is being 
substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don’t do any 
telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with SPAM. 
I’ve reached out and received little help from Verizon or AT Wondering what 
other are doing to get numbers “white listed” as I’m sure I’m not the only one 
facing this. Thanks Jason


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net

Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[Matthew Loraditch]

I’m wondering how this is all going work once shaken/stir are fully 
implemented. Are we going to have to prove we own numbers to other carriers? 
I’m sure many of us have DIDs outpulsed of alternative circuits at times.


Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Ryan Huff
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 1:52 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

[EXTERNAL]

You need to become a thorn in the side of the AM for your upstream carrier. 
It’s a carrier -2- carrier fight at that point.
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 3, 2020, at 13:49, JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>> wrote:

Thanks for all the replies thus far. To answer a couple of the questions that 
have come up, we are using valid, working DID numbers that we own for all 
outbound Calling Number Masks. And none of the DIDs forward to other carriers, 
they are all pointed from the PSTN to our various gateways.

One thing that was mentioned is that a SPAM autodialer bot has at some point 
spoofed some of our numbers causing them to be flagged as SPAM which is 
certainly a possibility and nothing we can do about that. I regularly get calls 
even on my cell phone with the whole “hey I missed a call form you” from the 
caller and they get irritated when I tell them, sorry I did not call you.

I know there is nothing we can do from a configuration perspective. I was just 
hoping there was some managed whitelist these carriers used that I was unaware 
of. I know there are various 3rd party apps that do this but its definitely 
something being done at the carrier level as well because I frequently get 
these messages as well on a Verizon phone and I do not have and SPAM apps or 
subscriptions.

As more and more numbers are spoofed for SPAM calls I imagine at some point all 
numbers will be flagged at potential SPAM at this rate.

So unless I missed something, it sounds like there is really nothing we can do 
about it?

Jason



From: Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>>
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 12:30 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
mailto:jason.burw...@foundersfcu.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

I’ve seen this happen on my Verizon cell recently. Was very surprised, it was 
the first time I had ever seen it.

CNAME dips and presentation are done by the called party’s carrier, so there 
isn’t anything (functionally) the calling party’s PBX can do to influence that. 
CNAME inserts are done by your upstream carrier, so if something has actually 
been modified in the CNAME database for your ANI, your upstream carrier would 
have done it.

The only real actionable thing I think you can do (besides changing your ANI to 
something else), is what you’ve done. Call your upstream carrier and give them 
call samples where your call was delivered by the called party’s carrier and 
masked with incorrect ANI. Let the carriers fight each other on the carrier 
level.
Sent from my iPhone



On Apr 3, 2020, at 12:13, JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>> wrote:

More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are showing 
as “Potential SPAM” on called party phones. Its causing some real problems 
because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases has 
requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don’t have 
voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not returning 
calls. I’m assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is being 
substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don’t do any 
telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with SPAM. 
I’ve reached out and received little help from Verizon or AT Wondering what 
other are doing to get numbers “white listed” as I’m sure I’m not the only one 
facing this. Thanks Jason


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net

Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[Ryan Huff]

You need to become a thorn in the side of the AM for your upstream carrier. 
It’s a carrier -2- carrier fight at that point.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 3, 2020, at 13:49, JASON BURWELL  wrote:


Thanks for all the replies thus far. To answer a couple of the questions that 
have come up, we are using valid, working DID numbers that we own for all 
outbound Calling Number Masks. And none of the DIDs forward to other carriers, 
they are all pointed from the PSTN to our various gateways.

One thing that was mentioned is that a SPAM autodialer bot has at some point 
spoofed some of our numbers causing them to be flagged as SPAM which is 
certainly a possibility and nothing we can do about that. I regularly get calls 
even on my cell phone with the whole “hey I missed a call form you” from the 
caller and they get irritated when I tell them, sorry I did not call you.

I know there is nothing we can do from a configuration perspective. I was just 
hoping there was some managed whitelist these carriers used that I was unaware 
of. I know there are various 3rd party apps that do this but its definitely 
something being done at the carrier level as well because I frequently get 
these messages as well on a Verizon phone and I do not have and SPAM apps or 
subscriptions.

As more and more numbers are spoofed for SPAM calls I imagine at some point all 
numbers will be flagged at potential SPAM at this rate.

So unless I missed something, it sounds like there is really nothing we can do 
about it?

Jason



From: Ryan Huff 
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 12:30 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

I’ve seen this happen on my Verizon cell recently. Was very surprised, it was 
the first time I had ever seen it.

CNAME dips and presentation are done by the called party’s carrier, so there 
isn’t anything (functionally) the calling party’s PBX can do to influence that. 
CNAME inserts are done by your upstream carrier, so if something has actually 
been modified in the CNAME database for your ANI, your upstream carrier would 
have done it.

The only real actionable thing I think you can do (besides changing your ANI to 
something else), is what you’ve done. Call your upstream carrier and give them 
call samples where your call was delivered by the called party’s carrier and 
masked with incorrect ANI. Let the carriers fight each other on the carrier 
level.
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 3, 2020, at 12:13, JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>> wrote:

More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are showing 
as “Potential SPAM” on called party phones. Its causing some real problems 
because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases has 
requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don’t have 
voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not returning 
calls. I’m assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is being 
substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don’t do any 
telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with SPAM. 
I’ve reached out and received little help from Verizon or AT Wondering what 
other are doing to get numbers “white listed” as I’m sure I’m not the only one 
facing this. Thanks Jason


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C025b5c5e1ee24bafb68408d7d7e9e664%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637215271894155219sdata=zqF5YXd0fzzHl21673j6mNrAMpXXNFuSYvppGmscXww%3Dreserved=0
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Re: PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip]

Thanks for all the replies thus far. To answer a couple of the questions that 
have come up, we are using valid, working DID numbers that we own for all 
outbound Calling Number Masks. And none of the DIDs forward to other carriers, 
they are all pointed from the PSTN to our various gateways.

One thing that was mentioned is that a SPAM autodialer bot has at some point 
spoofed some of our numbers causing them to be flagged as SPAM which is 
certainly a possibility and nothing we can do about that. I regularly get calls 
even on my cell phone with the whole “hey I missed a call form you” from the 
caller and they get irritated when I tell them, sorry I did not call you.

I know there is nothing we can do from a configuration perspective. I was just 
hoping there was some managed whitelist these carriers used that I was unaware 
of. I know there are various 3rd party apps that do this but its definitely 
something being done at the carrier level as well because I frequently get 
these messages as well on a Verizon phone and I do not have and SPAM apps or 
subscriptions.

As more and more numbers are spoofed for SPAM calls I imagine at some point all 
numbers will be flagged at potential SPAM at this rate.

So unless I missed something, it sounds like there is really nothing we can do 
about it?

Jason



From: Ryan Huff 
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 12:30 PM
To: JASON BURWELL 
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as 
"Potential SPAM"

CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe.

I’ve seen this happen on my Verizon cell recently. Was very surprised, it was 
the first time I had ever seen it.

CNAME dips and presentation are done by the called party’s carrier, so there 
isn’t anything (functionally) the calling party’s PBX can do to influence that. 
CNAME inserts are done by your upstream carrier, so if something has actually 
been modified in the CNAME database for your ANI, your upstream carrier would 
have done it.

The only real actionable thing I think you can do (besides changing your ANI to 
something else), is what you’ve done. Call your upstream carrier and give them 
call samples where your call was delivered by the called party’s carrier and 
masked with incorrect ANI. Let the carriers fight each other on the carrier 
level.
Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 3, 2020, at 12:13, JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>> wrote:

More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are showing 
as “Potential SPAM” on called party phones. Its causing some real problems 
because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases has 
requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don’t have 
voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not returning 
calls. I’m assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is being 
substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don’t do any 
telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with SPAM. 
I’ve reached out and received little help from Verizon or AT Wondering what 
other are doing to get numbers “white listed” as I’m sure I’m not the only one 
facing this. Thanks Jason


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C025b5c5e1ee24bafb68408d7d7e9e664%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637215271894155219sdata=zqF5YXd0fzzHl21673j6mNrAMpXXNFuSYvppGmscXww%3Dreserved=0
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

We got some email about this from our carrier. Basically, all outbound calls 
have to have a valid calling number id. I don't think it has anything to do 
with calling name.

I'd first check your outbound calling number id.

From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of JASON 
BURWELL via cisco-voip
Sent: Friday, April 3, 2020 12:09 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are showing 
as "Potential SPAM" on called party phones. Its causing some real problems 
because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases has 
requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don't have 
voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not returning 
calls. I'm assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is being 
substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don't do any 
telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with SPAM. 
I've reached out and received little help from Verizon or AT Wondering what 
other are doing to get numbers "white listed" as I'm sure I'm not the only one 
facing this. Thanks Jason


<>___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[Ryan Huff]

I’ve seen this happen on my Verizon cell recently. Was very surprised, it was 
the first time I had ever seen it.

CNAME dips and presentation are done by the called party’s carrier, so there 
isn’t anything (functionally) the calling party’s PBX can do to influence that. 
CNAME inserts are done by your upstream carrier, so if something has actually 
been modified in the CNAME database for your ANI, your upstream carrier would 
have done it.

The only real actionable thing I think you can do (besides changing your ANI to 
something else), is what you’ve done. Call your upstream carrier and give them 
call samples where your call was delivered by the called party’s carrier and 
masked with incorrect ANI. Let the carriers fight each other on the carrier 
level.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 3, 2020, at 12:13, JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip 
 wrote:


More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are showing 
as “Potential SPAM” on called party phones. Its causing some real problems 
because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases has 
requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don’t have 
voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not returning 
calls. I’m assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is being 
substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don’t do any 
telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with SPAM. 
I’ve reached out and received little help from Verizon or AT Wondering what 
other are doing to get numbers “white listed” as I’m sure I’m not the only one 
facing this. Thanks Jason


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C025b5c5e1ee24bafb68408d7d7e9e664%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637215271894155219sdata=zqF5YXd0fzzHl21673j6mNrAMpXXNFuSYvppGmscXww%3Dreserved=0
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[UC Penguin]

What external phone number mask are you using?

Is it a valid number?

I’ve seen issues with configs that use invalid masks such as 612-000-. 
Carrier will reject the call with busy tone (Comcast).

Another issue that occurs is when a cell phone user calls your DID and is 
forwarded to another cell carrier. The carrier will either reject the call or 
display SPAM/SCAM Likely.

There are feature codes to disable this behavior on the called cell phone. For 
T-Mobile: https://www.t-mobile.com/news/scamblockparty

> On Apr 3, 2020, at 11:13, JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are 
> showing as “Potential SPAM” on called party phones. Its causing some real 
> problems because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases 
> has requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don’t 
> have voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not 
> returning calls. I’m assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is 
> being substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don’t do any 
> telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with 
> SPAM. I’ve reached out and received little help from Verizon or AT 
> Wondering what other are doing to get numbers “white listed” as I’m sure I’m 
> not the only one facing this. Thanks Jason
>  
>  
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] PSTN Calls Incorrectly Flagged as "Potential SPAM"

[JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip]

More and more I have users reporting that their outbound PSTN calls are showing 
as "Potential SPAM" on called party phones. Its causing some real problems 
because these are legitimate calls that the customer in many cases has 
requested but they are ignoring it due to the message and if they don't have 
voicemail set up or its full they have the perception we are not returning 
calls. I'm assuming the Caller ID name in the national Database is being 
substituted with this message by the wireless carriers. We don't do any 
telemarketing so there is no reason why our calls should be flagged with SPAM. 
I've reached out and received little help from Verizon or AT Wondering what 
other are doing to get numbers "white listed" as I'm sure I'm not the only one 
facing this. Thanks Jason


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip