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

[Paul Timmins <paul () telcodata us>]

A *LOT* goes through at least one TDM transition (so you can kiss that 
identity header goodbye). None of the big names in long distance 
termination support STIR/SHAKEN. There's about 4-5 that will do 
STIR/SHAKEN outside of testbed connectivity (my employer is one). One 
big name is still using a self signed certificate to sign their 
STIR/SHAKEN calls, it'll expire in a couple weeks so they should figure 
life out quickly. I won't shame them here.

The lions share of intercarrier traffic won't go through SIP until the 
big ILECs are required to interconnect over SIP in reasonable and 
non-discriminatory ways. I'm not holding my breath.

(AT&T Wireless and Verizon Wireless hide behind their respective 
landline networks generally, and without SIP connectivity to those, you 
won't be getting green checkmark calls to people on the two largest 
wireless carriers outside of private testbed connectivity anytime soon)

https://authenticate.iconectiv.com/authorized-service-providers-authenticate 


-Paul

On 9/10/20 4:09 PM, Michael Thomas 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