Yes, I don't think there is a technical problem. There is a trust issue, which really is the discussion we are having. It actually is possible for any carrier to determine if the carrier handing it a call is the "owner" of the TN, even if they don't do it in practice. You seem to want to break that.
Seems like you need to change the actual ownership of the number to the user, and you need a way to establish a chain of trust, in order for things like CallerId to work reliably. Actually, around here, we have the opposite problem. There are certain carriers who in fact do allow spoofing of called party number. It has caused quite a bit of controversy and I expect regulation soon. In your proposals to the regulator, are you asking that ownership of a number clearly be vested in the user, and have you proposed a mechanism for how such ownership would be verified? A properly administered user enum system might do. Brian -----Original Message----- From: Juha Heinanen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 11:14 AM To: Brian Rosen Cc: 'Dan Wing'; 'Elwell, John'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] Subject: RE: [Sip] E.164 - who owns it Brian Rosen writes: > As a practical matter, the way calls are routed, it isn't I believe. Are > you aware of a country that allows it? I'd love to see the routing tables. > You've got a better shot of allowing two carriers to originate a call with > the same e.164. this latter thing is what i have been demanding the regulator in finland to allow. i don't think there are any technical problems in implementing it. -- juha _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
