[VoiceOps] Outsourcing STIR/SHAKEN Setup

Paul Timmins ptimmins at clearrate.com
Wed Sep 2 15:12:20 EDT 2020


Exactly that. The idea is collateral pain for misbehavior. Or attorneys 
general knocking on doors wondering why they're allowing robocalls 
through their network. Ideally both.

On 9/2/20 3:06 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
> That’s what I thought, thank you for clarifying. I was just confused 
> because of the language in Paul’s previous explanation—no fault of his.
>
> But in the bottom of the barrel, it will leave some folks with a 
> conundrum about what to do when XYZTelecom sends their good 
> conversational traffic through their peer A, and their crappier 
> traffic through their peer B. But I suppose that is the very dilemma 
> that this technique is meant to force.
>
>> Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.
>
>> On Sep 2, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Mark Lindsey <lindsey at e-c-group.com> wrote:
>>
>> SHAKEN doesn't record the chain (like you'd see with Via headers, 
>> for example) of Intermediate Providers who handle the call. There's 
>> only one Identity header and it is to be passed unchanged from the 
>> origin point to the terminating Voice Service Provider.
>>
>> When the Identity header with PASSporT arrives at the final Voice 
>> Service Provider, that recipient can determine who created the 
>> PASSporT and then make judgments. For example, there has been a lot 
>> of discussion in FCC filings about "reputation" of service providers. 
>> Perhaps you could subscribe to a Reputation database to determine 
>> what to do with the calls.
>>
>> For example, "This call got an A level attestation from XYZTelecom, 
>> but XYZTelecom has a 5% score in the reputation database, so I'm 
>> going to treat it as if this call is likely a nuisance call."
>>
>>
>>
>> *Mark R Lindsey, SMTS**| **+1-229-316-0013****|****mark at ecg.co 
>> <mailto:mark at ecg.co>**|**https://ecg.co/lindsey/*
>> *
>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 2, 2020, at 2:52 PM, Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com 
>>> <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you, that’s very clear and sums it all up!
>>>
>>> One lingering question: even without providing a fully attestable 
>>> chain of custody, if the call took a route A -> B -> C, are 
>>> signatures cumulative such that I could block calls attested by B 
>>> coming through C? Or am I constrained to blocking a certain level of 
>>> attestation only through the last/proximate peering hop (C) that 
>>> directly touches me?
>>>
>>> I suppose success is going to come down to the on-the-ground 
>>> realities, political viability, etc of taking that “block attested 
>>> calls from carrier X” step.
>>>
>>>>>> Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.
>>>
>>>> On Sep 2, 2020, at 2:47 PM, Paul Timmins <ptimmins at clearrate.com 
>>>> <mailto:ptimmins at clearrate.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> The solution is that you sign your calls with your certificate. 
>>>> Carriers aren't doing LNP dips to verify the number is really 
>>>> yours, they're trusting your attestation (A: yes, the caller id is 
>>>> verified, B: it comes from our customer, but not verified, C: "this 
>>>> touched our switches, good luck with it"). If you attest total 
>>>> nonsense as A, or send tons of nonsense in general, people start 
>>>> blocking calls you sign.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It really verifies who is sending the call, and what that company 
>>>> says the call is verified, not a full chain of custody of the 
>>>> number back to the NANPA/PA. Could you attest A a call from "0" or 
>>>> "911", or "999-999-9999"? Yes, you could. It'd work for a while, 
>>>> til someone said "Wow, Alex's SPID is signing tons of bullshit. 
>>>> Let's block attested calls from his SPID"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *From:* VoiceOps <voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org 
>>>> <mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org>> on behalf of Alex Balashov 
>>>> <abalashov at evaristesys.com <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com>>
>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 2, 2020 2:42 PM
>>>> *To:* VoiceOps
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] Outsourcing STIR/SHAKEN Setup
>>>> LCR or no LCR, using a termination vendor that is different to 
>>>> one’s origination vendor for a given CID is more normal than not in 
>>>> VoIP. I would guess it’s the default wholesale use-case. 
>>>> Origination and termination are very different business models with 
>>>> radically different economics.
>>>>
>>>> I’m not clear on what the official STIR/SHAKEN solution to this is. 
>>>> I assume it’s delegated certificates as Jared suggested.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from mobile, with due apologies for brevity and errors.
>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 2, 2020, at 2:39 PM, Carlos Alvarez <caalvarez at gmail.com 
>>>>> <mailto:caalvarez at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>> If I understand correctly, no as long as your providers are all 
>>>>> supporting this. What I think you mean is that you get 
>>>>> origination/DIDs from say Bandwidth, and you use LCR to route 
>>>>> calls to whoever is cheapest?  There are ways to work with that 
>>>>> challenge as long as your carriers are ready to do so.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 11:28 AM Jared Geiger <jared at compuwizz.net 
>>>>> <mailto:jared at compuwizz.net>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>     If we purchase our numbers through wholesalers, would we need
>>>>>     delegated certificates if we are sending an outbound call
>>>>>     through a vendor that is not the wholesaler we got the number
>>>>>     from?
>>>>>
>>>>>     On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 7:22 AM Dave Frigen <dfrigen at wabash.net
>>>>>     <mailto:dfrigen at wabash.net>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>         There is a STIR-SHAKEN process of registering and testing
>>>>>         with the Policy
>>>>>         Administrator (PA) as a certified Service Provider (SP)
>>>>>         before you can
>>>>>         purchase SHAKEN token certificates from a Certificate
>>>>>         Authority (CA) and
>>>>>         begin to engage in using the technology. This is not a
>>>>>         walk in the park.
>>>>>         Transnexus is one of two public CA's in the U.S. today.
>>>>>         They are experts on
>>>>>         the subject and can help you through both processes. In
>>>>>         order to get the
>>>>>         best call attestation you must prove to the PA and CA that
>>>>>         you are a bono
>>>>>         fide service provider and not a bad-acting enterprise on a
>>>>>         network that
>>>>>         deserves lesser attestation levels.
>>>>>
>>>>>         One of the registration requirements is a SP 's access to
>>>>>         valid national
>>>>>         phone number pools. This has been very confusing for some
>>>>>         resale providers
>>>>>         that purchase and use numbers from wholesalers only. If
>>>>>         your organization
>>>>>         does not have it's own numbering resources, you can
>>>>>         register using your
>>>>>         wholesale provider's numbering pool data. Don't assume you
>>>>>         have to register
>>>>>         with the FCC and possess your own pool of numbers to
>>>>>         become a registered
>>>>>         SHAKEN SP.
>>>>>
>>>>>         SHAKEN ROBO call mitigation is a new frontier, and
>>>>>         obtaining the best
>>>>>         attestation level possible for a SP is essential to the SP
>>>>>         and the SHAKEN
>>>>>         ecosystem. Register and test for the best attestation
>>>>>         level possible.
>>>>>         Transnexus is a seasoned expert on the subject and a U.S.
>>>>>         registered CA with
>>>>>         the PA.
>>>>>
>>>>>         Dave
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>         -----Original Message-----
>>>>>         From: VoiceOps <voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org
>>>>>         <mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org>> On Behalf Of Mary
>>>>>         Lou Carey
>>>>>         Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 5:36 PM
>>>>>         To: Dovid Bender <dovid at telecurve.com
>>>>>         <mailto:dovid at telecurve.com>>
>>>>>         Cc: Voiceops.org <http://Voiceops.org>
>>>>>         <voiceops at voiceops.org <mailto:voiceops at voiceops.org>>
>>>>>         Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Outsourcing STIR/SHAKEN Setup
>>>>>
>>>>>         I'm a Carrier Consultant who's been helping CLEC, IXC,
>>>>>         Paging, Wireless and
>>>>>         VOIP carriers install and maintain their PSTN networks for
>>>>>         the the last 20
>>>>>         years. I can help clients get their FCC Certification to
>>>>>         become a
>>>>>         STIR/SHAKEN carrier as well as Numbering Resources, NPAC /
>>>>>         LSR training, etc
>>>>>         (if you need those pieces). Once my clients get their
>>>>>         certification, I refer
>>>>>         them to TransNexus. Jim and his team can help you with the
>>>>>         process of
>>>>>         turning your STIR/SHAKEN services up.
>>>>>
>>>>>         MARY LOU CAREY
>>>>>         BackUP Telecom Consulting
>>>>>         Office: 615-791-9969
>>>>>         Cell: 615-796-1111
>>>>>
>>>>>         On 2020-08-31 05:37 AM, Dovid Bender wrote:
>>>>>         > Hi,
>>>>>         >
>>>>>         > Does anyone have a recommendation for a company that get
>>>>>         us everything
>>>>>         > needed for STIR/SHAKEN setup? By setup I mean helping us
>>>>>         file to get a
>>>>>         > cert etc. From the small research I have done there is a
>>>>>         lot of
>>>>>         > fragmented information out there and it would be easier
>>>>>         for us to pay
>>>>>         > someone else to do this then invest our own time to take
>>>>>         care of this.
>>>>>         >
>>>>>         > TIA.
>>>>>         >
>>>>>         > Regards,
>>>>>         >
>>>>>         > Dovid
>>>>>         > _______________________________________________
>>>>>         > VoiceOps mailing list
>>>>>         > VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org>
>>>>>         > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>>>         VoiceOps mailing list
>>>>>         VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org>
>>>>>         https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>>>
>>>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>>>         VoiceOps mailing list
>>>>>         VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org>
>>>>>         https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>>>
>>>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>>>     VoiceOps mailing list
>>>>>     VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org>
>>>>>     https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>>>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org>
>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org <mailto:VoiceOps at voiceops.org>
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>
>> *Mark R Lindsey, SMTS*| +1-229-316-0013|mark at ecg.co 
>> <mailto:mark at ecg.co>|*https://ecg.co/lindsey/*
>> *
>> *
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20200902/684af516/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the VoiceOps mailing list