Re: [stir] reality check

Richard Shockey <> Thu, 16 March 2017 14:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41D68129544 for <>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 07:50:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.695
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.695 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.796, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3qyLxt8sFW_C for <>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 07:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with SMTP id 6088812951D for <>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 07:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 26102 invoked by uid 0); 16 Mar 2017 14:49:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO CMOut01) ( by with SMTP; 16 Mar 2017 14:49:55 -0000
Received: from ([]) by CMOut01 with id wekr1u00q1MNPNq01ekuhB; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:44:55 -0600
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=Ath9goNP c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=jTEj1adHphCQ5SwrTAOQMg==:117 a=jTEj1adHphCQ5SwrTAOQMg==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=1oJP67jkp3AA:10 a=6Iz7jQTuP9IA:10 a=ZZnuYtJkoWoA:10 a=PeFO9FbFhS32YxYntvkA:9 a=NvC-MaXgAAAA:8 a=ll-iCDY8AAAA:8 a=M0OflfRGAAAA:8 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=scBmumm3AAAA:8 a=VfgTrTGYAAAA:8 a=zQP7CpKOAAAA:8 a=hGBaWAWWAAAA:8 a=Rif539P12fAE56MwO-sA:9 a=m-6xbosVmN1ZbyS3:21 a=HD1SbHP_xlGaA_EK:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=ivbTfD_dPm4A:10 a=V94yKsZkkUoA:10 a=j3Ro9XrFPQsA:10 a=yMhMjlubAAAA:8 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=hatBI1J7Q-t2mKnziWEA:9 a=h_orbKXs3FMe2t6z:21 a=eRCIl5Fq5FV7gKwM:21 a=7QXsHTaJpRvAfMqD:21 a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 a=lCKLaNiBY0u9urARF_50:22 a=VpyrLIdO_Ztbr3SWPBuH:22 a=6yl0mh0s51TKORVA8GqK:22 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22 a=ef56qr_8hkesV0SKvPxj:22 a=ORFRI7aeUVbPhtmlmiRh:22 a=obGFCI3_7AGB19sD6zJV:22 a=Q-ofuW86YyylptHqTH-7:22 a=BKKCjISod1eDJeS0ORpz:22 a=zjWhRoSqWz9hl55Hdlzg:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; h=Content-type:Mime-version:In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID:CC: To:From:Subject:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Ms1GLteSBDDv7Y3sjUJ+Egudk9p2aUrMkv4t4+I5e/Y=; b=D5PahsCljL1KBAWKcTm5KsfJOx x5JgTZV7X37n1cVNTof67aC1t1R1qEdtV9iM6NxJi73ZODvvzE9eNrXflaMS0fDOwS9guRK5AF5x7 k8/83UOjQguOlRkRx48pVQ3Vr;
Received: from ([]:50880 helo=[]) by with esmtpa (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <>) id 1coWe3-0003jB-Eu; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:44:51 -0600
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.20.0.170309
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 10:44:49 -0400
From: Richard Shockey <>
To:, Alex Bobotek <>, Richard Barnes <>, "DOLLY, MARTIN C" <>
CC: "" <>, "Peterson, Jon" <>
Message-ID: <>
Thread-Topic: [stir] reality check
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3572505891_564559782"
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname -
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain -
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain -
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Exim-ID: 1coWe3-0003jB-Eu
X-Source-Sender: ([]) []:50880
X-Email-Count: 11
X-Source-Cap: c2hvY2tleXU7c2hvY2tleXU7Ym94NDYyLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [stir] reality check
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:50:00 -0000


FYI folks the actual comments on CRTC Consultation 2017-4 are here.


There are only 26 or so.  I haven’t read through all of them but most of the comments are pretty predictable.  “Its early etc.” “Its premature.”  


In any event the CRTC has done a fine job here laying out some of the ongoing issues and they should be congratulated for doing so.  The current FCC proceeding ( CG Docket No 17-59 ) is an excellent first start on the Do Not Originate list but IMHO is by no means the last word on the subject. We haven’t heard from our British friends but I have confidence we will eventually. ☺ 


CIRA which is .CA is already lining up to act as the Trust Anchor in Canada.


As for ITU-T,  I’m just not going there. 



Richard Shockey

Shockey Consulting LLC

Chairman of the Board SIP Forum


Skype-Linkedin-Facebook –Twitter  rshockey101

PSTN +1 703-593-2683



From: stir <> on behalf of Tony Rutkowski <>
Organization: Yaana Technologies
Reply-To: <>
Date: Thursday, March 16, 2017 at 9:03 AM
To: Alex Bobotek <>, Richard Shockey <>, Richard Barnes <>, "DOLLY, MARTIN C" <>
Cc: "" <>, "Peterson, Jon" <>
Subject: [stir] reality check


Given the proclivity to use Bond themes,
it might be useful to take stock of what
seems like Never Say Die and the STIR/
SHAKEN gambit.

It is rather clear that given what is occurring
in different jurisdictions around the world,
STIR/SHAKEN has a chance of somewhere
close to zero to be implemented on even a
limited scale.  Talking about "governance"
seems delusional.

The only thing the FCC is doing is proposing
allowing regulated carriers to block traffic
at their customer's request. That is the best
possible outcome after what will be a long
comment and reply proceeding period, if not
additional litigation on multiple causes of

Given the overwhelming negative responses
about STIR/SHAKEN in the CRTC proceeding
comment period ending yesterday - especially 
by Canadian industry, it seems highly unlikely 
they are going to be implementing anything
along the lines of STIR/SHAKEN.

And then there is the rest of the world whose
views seem to range between outright rejection and
pursuit of probabilistic rather than ancient deterministic
(e.g., STIR/SHAKEN) solutions.  That was the 
reaction at the ETSI CYBER#9 meeting a few
weeks ago.  It is also reflected in the latest draft
on the subject into the upcoming ITU-T SG17 meeting.
Indeed, there are multiple other inputs - especially
by Alibaba - that point to a shift to probabilistic
options.  Indeed, that is where the innovations
are occurring - and the FCC NPRM/NOI fortuitously
allows for them.  Canada being a progressive nation
seems likely to encourage them as well.

The emerging enhanced/extensible versions of
CNAM that facilitate probabilistic solutions are
where the focus seems likely.  (I'm still waiting
for the ATIS' version to be make publicly available.
It seems like don't want anyone so see it.)


ps. STIR/SHAKEN looks rather like the old CCITT
clinging onto the ancient past. :-)

_______________________________________________ stir mailing list