Re: FCC: rulemaking on STIR/SHAKEN and Caller ID Authentication

[Brandon Svec <bsvec () teamonesolutions com>]

99%?  If a phone number was used than the PSTN was used. The fact that SIP
is involved in part or all of the call path is not very relevant except for
peer-to-peer stuff like whatsapp, skype, signal, telegram, etc. (and even
those don't use SIP, but I think you meant voip more than SIP specifically)
Even some of those can use e.164 for part or all of the path.

I do believe that if the robo call/scam/fraudulent call issue does not get
resolved people may eventually start to give up and just use apps like
that.  Many probably have already.

*Brandon Svec*

*15106862204 <15106862204> voice|sms**teamonesolutions.com
<https://teamonesolutions.com/>*


On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 1:11 PM Michael Thomas <mike () mtcc com> wrote:

> On 9/10/20 9:49 AM, Sean Donelan wrote:
> > At this month's FCC rulemaking meeting, it will consider
> https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-announces-tentative-agenda-september-open-meeting-6
> > Promoting Caller ID Authentication to Combat Spoofed Robocalls – The
> > Commission will consider a Report and Order that would continue its
> > work to implement the TRACED Act and promote the deployment of caller
> > ID authentication technology to combat spoofed robocalls.
> > (WC Docket No. 17-97)
>
>
> So I have a question: what percentage of traffic in the US is really
> coming from the legacy PSTN? My understanding is that it's pretty low
> these days.
>
> If that's true, it seems to me that this is a SIP problem, not an e.164
> problem.
>
> Mike