Re: [cnit] CNIT Charter bashing..

[Henning Schulzrinne <[e-mail]>]

With in-band delivery, controlling delivery of information should, in theory, be easier, since we no longer rely on third-party services.

My guess is that many PBX and SIP trunking systems rely on companies like OpenCNAM or the other service providers listed at http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/CNAM . They currently can't provide call-by-call privacy, only a global "always on"/"always off" setting.

Thus, I think we all agree that callers should have control, either permanently or maybe call-by-call, on whether to disclose caller name information, and callers should be aware that this information may be visible to carriers in the call path. (In many cases, that's likely to be just the caller's carrier and the destination carrier, but things obviously sometimes get more complicated in rural call scenarios or if there's a separate LD carrier.)

Henning
________________________________________
From: Dwight, Timothy M (Tim) [[e-mail]]
Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 7:09 PM
To: Henning Schulzrinne; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [cnit] CNIT Charter bashing..

Henning,

As you may know, there are controls over disclosure of calling name data that mirror those which govern disclosure of calling number.  In the conventional CNAM model these are attributes in the LIDB.  These need either to be explicitly changed (e.g., if consumers no longer need these protections) or replicated into whatever alternative model this group develops.  Since it's not up to the IETF to determine public policy, I guess we're best off trying to replicate the existing functionality.

Intuitively I agree that an entity with a "public" or "semi-public" telephone number would probably not object to their name being displayed to people they call.  But that is not necessarily the case.  All I can say for sure is that today consumers have control over this (you can mark your name "public" or "private" in the LIDB;  and you can ask that name presentation be "tied" to number presentation - i.e., if you can ask that presentation of your name be blocked if presentation of your number is blocked, either permanently or call-by-call).

Similarly I can't say for sure whether anyone would object to their name being visible to networks or network elements to which it is not visible today.  I think if we propose to increase its visibility the onus is on us to be sure.

Tim