[VoiceOps] Stale Caller ID

[Jawaid Bazyar]

There is no one cnam database.

On Sun, Nov 3, 2024, 5:09 PM Ross Tajvar <ross at tajvar.io> wrote:

> Are there multiple official CNAM databases? I thought there was just the
> LIDB.
>
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2024 at 9:30 AM Jawaid Bazyar via VoiceOps <
> voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> let's think about this a bit..
>>
>> only the carrier that owns the number (according to LNP database etc.)
>> knows what the CNAM data should be
>> only that carrier should be able to edit CNAM data
>>
>> currently, as Kidd noted, terminating carriers look up the data (from one
>> of numerous incomplete repositories of CNAM data)
>> And if the database isn't the same one that the owning carrier publishes
>> in then the data is just bad - cached, out of date, etc.
>>
>> How much are you all paying for CNAM data lookup on a monthly basis?
>>
>> The thing in the Internet world that this is the closest to, is DNS, and
>> that's free to publish into and free to query. The costs of running the
>> system are distributed.
>>
>> The key difference is how the system knows who controls a record and has
>> the right to update it. Which is a more or less solved problem.
>>
>> So then it comes down to the technical means to get existing switches /
>> PBXs etc to query the data. And to query the legacy databases during a
>> transition time.
>>
>> Jawaid
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 4:11 PM Kidd Filby via VoiceOps <
>> voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
>>
>>> In US PSTN-speak…. CallerID/name is a terminating feature, unlike Canada
>>> which is an Originating feature (data sent from caller). Until that
>>> changes, we are at the mercy of cached data by providers who don’t
>>> refresh/update their data. Unless Everyone dips the same exact database,
>>> which I don’t see happening anytime soon, there will be inconsistencies
>>> between carriers/providers.
>>>
>>> Kidd Filby
>>> 661.557.5640 (C)
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/kiddfilby
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 12:47 chris via VoiceOps <voiceops at voiceops.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's too bad ENUM never took off. Would have been great to dip the
>>>> number get direct sip uri, get a url/pointer to caller id/cnam data etc.
>>>> Not to mention direct peering without so many hops.
>>>>
>>>> - chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2024, 2:29 PM Shawn L via VoiceOps <
>>>> voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, you're at the mercy of the call-ed party's carrier.  A
>>>>> lot of providers maintain their own database, and only periodically update
>>>>> it. I suspect this is a hold-over from when dips were expensive.  That
>>>>> carrier may, or may not update their databases regularly.  For esample when
>>>>> I call one of our consultants, my caller id comes up on his phone as the
>>>>> person who had my DID 20+ years ago, well before we had a relationship with
>>>>> the consultant.  The correct information is being sent from our switch, and
>>>>> Neustar has the correct information, but his provider (I think verizon) is
>>>>> sending something that's completely wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 2:21 PM Mike Hammett via VoiceOps <
>>>>> voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, you're right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CNAM
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----
>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Midwest Internet Exchange
>>>>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: "Alex Balashov via VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org>
>>>>>> To: "VoiceOps" <voiceops at voiceops.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, November 1, 2024 1:06:45 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Stale Caller ID
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Caller ID, or calling name (CNAM)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > On Nov 1, 2024, at 1:52 pm, Mike Hammett via VoiceOps <
>>>>>> voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > How common is how stale of caller ID data? We have a customer that
>>>>>> is complaining that they're getting the wrong data on their phone. They
>>>>>> insist it's not a local directory. We've verified it works fine on other
>>>>>> providers.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > -----
>>>>>> > Mike Hammett
>>>>>> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>> > http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Midwest Internet Exchange
>>>>>> > http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > VoiceOps mailing list
>>>>>> > VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>>>>>> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Alex Balashov
>>>>>> Principal Consultant
>>>>>> Evariste Systems LLC
>>>>>> Web: https://evaristesys.com
>>>>>> Tel: +1-706-510-6800
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>>>>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>>>>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>>>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20241103/a0c91daa/attachment-0001.htm>