nanog mailing list archives
Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021)
From: Paul Timmins <paul () telcodata us>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 16:05:06 -0400
On 7/1/21 3:53 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
And this is why this problem will not be solved. The "open relay" is making money from processing the calls, and the end carrier is making money for terminating them. Until fine(s) -- hopefully millions of them, one for each improperly terminated call, together with jail time for the CEO of the company for "conspiracy to commit fraud" -- and EACH of the fines is EQUAL OR GREATER than the total yearly worldwide REVENUE of that end carrier, they will not have any impetus to "fix" the problem.
How about 47 CFR 64.1200(k)(4)?(4) A provider may block voice calls or cease to accept traffic from an originating or intermediate provider <https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=643618fc7955a6798d0c07a136e40fef&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:47:Chapter:I:Subchapter:B:Part:64:Subpart:L:64.1200> without liability under the Communications Act or the Commission's rules where the originating or intermediate provider <https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=643618fc7955a6798d0c07a136e40fef&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:47:Chapter:I:Subchapter:B:Part:64:Subpart:L:64.1200>, when notified by the Commission, fails to effectively mitigate illegal traffic within 48 hours or fails to implement effective measures to prevent new and renewing customers <https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=53789aafb18c69f4ad1df8f063611a51&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:47:Chapter:I:Subchapter:B:Part:64:Subpart:L:64.1200> from using its network to originate illegal calls. Prior to initiating blocking, the provider shall provide the Commission with notice and a brief summary of the basis for its determination that the originating or intermediate provider <https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=643618fc7955a6798d0c07a136e40fef&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:47:Chapter:I:Subchapter:B:Part:64:Subpart:L:64.1200> meets one or more of these two conditions for blocking.
ie: "You're not really a phone company anymore, says the rest of the PSTN" https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/64.1200
Current thread:
- RE: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Keith Medcalf (Jul 01)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Paul Timmins (Jul 01)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Michael Thomas (Jul 02)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Andreas Ott (Jul 01)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Nick Olsen (Jul 02)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Paul Timmins (Jul 02)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Michael Thomas (Jul 02)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Nick Olsen (Jul 02)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Paul Timmins (Jul 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Ryan Finnesey via NANOG (Jul 09)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Jeff Shultz (Jul 09)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Josh Luthman (Jul 09)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Brandon Svec via NANOG (Jul 09)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Michael Thomas (Jul 09)
- Re: SITR/SHAKEN implementation in effect today (June 30 2021) Jeff Shultz (Jul 09)