Re: [cnit] CNIT Charter bashing..

[Henning Schulzrinne <[e-mail]>]

In almost all cases of interest, the calling party *wants* to disclose accurate information to the called party, so the privacy issues don't seem to arise. They would only arise if there was forced disclosure; I don't think anybody is proposing that.

________________________________________
From: cnit [[e-mail]] on behalf of Richard Shockey [[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 9:50 AM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [cnit] CNIT Charter bashing..

In North America it has been wildly popular and indeed considered
essential offering for the competitive voice providers aka cable. Its a
good business.  There is actually consensus in the NA industry if you want
interconnected point to point video to deploy some enhancement to the
service is essential. The contact in the phone book is not enough. Ok sure
for the 65% of calls that are part of the 20-40 numbers in your dialer but
there are other applications here such as public safety where
authenticated identity of the calling party may have significant benefits.

It it my understanding that there are valid concerns about the
Privacy/Information issues etc but really who¹s privacy are you
protecting? The calling party or the called party.  I¹ve heard the
arguments. Its actually a very very interesting debate.