[cisco-voip] SNR and caller-id - cell phone doesn't showcustomers number but instead the office number

Thu May 27 10:19:00 EDT 2010

A bit off topic from the original thread but I found that setting the
diversion header to a SIP trunk associated DID I could mask CLID to anything
I wanted, this was another instance where the client needed to
mask their 800 number and the provider said you can't do that on a SIP trunk
which sent our client into a frenzy. It also works well for failover of
another trunks (PRI/POTs) to SIP and the users can maintain their local
CLID. No clue if this works with Verizon but it worked where I was told it
wouldn't...

voice class sip-profiles 1
 request INVITE sip-header Diversion add "Diversion:<
sip:9195551212 at 192.168.0.1 <sip%3A9195551212 at 192.168.0.1>>.*"

On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Jason Aarons (US) <
jason.aarons at us.didata.com> wrote:

>  Verizon is a SIP provider and they only allow your DID/BTN.
>
>
>
> I liked the answer about CallManager 8.0+ and RDNIS, or SIP Diversion
> Header
>
> http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/RDNIS
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121rel/sipcfs/hennigan.htm
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Jim McBurnett
>
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 27, 2010 8:46 AM
> *To:* Ted Nugent; Ahmed Elnagar
>
> *Cc:* cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] SNR and caller-id - cell phone doesn't
> showcustomers number but instead the office number
>
>
>
> AT&T—Legacy BellSouth requires a letter to allow this.
>
> SIP providers don’t care..
>
> Most CLECS in the SE US don’t care..
>
> Matter of fact on a misconfigured PRI I saw the 3 digit extensions being
> sent out..
>
>
>
> I have heard the  story of someone sending 666 as the caller ID just to
> mess with someone..
>
>
>
> Totally carrier dependent..
>
> However there was a note somewhere about a month or so ago about this all
> changing, due to some new regulations regarding fraud prevention..
>
> I don’t remember the details other than not to forward numbers that don’t
> belong to you in an attempt to mask your true identity..
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Ted Nugent
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 26, 2010 6:22 PM
> *To:* Ahmed Elnagar
> *Cc:* cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] SNR and caller-id - cell phone doesn't
> showcustomers number but instead the office number
>
>
>
> I have literally setup 100s of PRIs and at least in the US  have only 2
> instances that i can remember where a provider has not allowed the client to
> pass their own CLID if its specifically requested. I actually just did a
> handful of new full and frac PRIs over the past 2 weeks and there was no
> push back whatsoever from 2 separate providers? perhaps it is provider
> specific and i have just been lucky?? I don't know... This is almost a
> mandatory requirement when clients needs to mask with a tollfree number and
> if this is changing I can foresee many unhappy clients.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Ahmed Elnagar <ahmed_elnagar at rayacorp.com>
> wrote:
>
> I think it is very difficult to convince a provider to allow just
> everything to pass from your E1’s…it is new for me to know that some
> providers allows you to set caller ID on your own.
>
>
>
>  Best Regards;
>
>   Ahmed Elnagar
>
>   Senior Network PS Engineer
>
>   Mob: +2019-0016211
>
>   CCIE#24697 (Voice)
>
>  [image: ccie_voice_large.gif][image: ccvp_voice_large.gif]
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Ted Nugent
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 26, 2010 6:53 PM
>
>
> *To:* Jason Aarons (US)
> *Cc:* cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] SNR and caller-id - cell phone doesn't
> showcustomers number but instead the office number
>
>
>
> Historically we've just had the provider remove the screening table (aka
> allow CPE to provide CLID) but if your hitting new legislation then I can
> see SNR for MOST clients going into the toilet. Is q931 debug showing proper
> CLID on the outbound leg? if so then and the provider refuses to work with
> you then I agree with the sales people its totally useless. I've been lucky
> enough not to have this be a problem yet on a PRI.
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Jason Aarons (US) <
> jason.aarons at us.didata.com> wrote:
>
> Sales people are asking if the original calling party number can show up
> when using Mobility (SNR).  So call comes into office, office dials out up
> to 4 locations passing the office’s caller id to the cell phone.  Lots of
> telcos block what caller id can come out of your PRI (usually it’s your DIDs
> or the main BTN), a few will pass anything, in the case of this customer
> their telco limits what they can pass to main number/DIDs.
>
>
>
> So the feedback from the customer is that SNR is useless for sales people
> as they answer their cell phone only based upon Caller ID and now all calls
> from customers show the main office phone number in caller id
>
>
>
> Is there any feedback? Seems the FCC is enacting new legislation limiting
> what calling party numbers can be passed out, seems a few telemarkers have
> been forging their calling party number to get around call blocking
> equipment.
>
>
>
> https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2013151.pdf
>
> This didn’t work as telco is overwriting by policy.
>
>
>
>
>   ------------------------------
>
> *Disclaimer: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the designated
> addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the intended addressee, you
> are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and
> that any use or reproduction of this email or its contents is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in
> error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting
> it from your computer. Thank you. *
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
>
> Disclaimer: NOTICE The information contained in this message is
> confidential and is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you have received
> this message in error or there are any problems please notify the originator
> immediately. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this
> message is strictly forbidden. Raya will not be liable for direct, special,
> indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of
> this message by a third party or as a result of any malicious code or virus
> being passed on. Views expressed in this communication are not necessarily
> those of Raya.If you have received this message in error, please notify the
> sender immediately by email, facsimile or telephone and return and/or
> destroy the original message.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> * Disclaimer: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the designated
> addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the intended addressee, you
> are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and
> that any use or reproduction of this email or its contents is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in
> error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting
> it from your computer. Thank you. *
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100527/fff14da6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1806 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100527/fff14da6/attachment-0002.jpe>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100527/fff14da6/attachment-0003.jpe>