Re: [stir] The Canadian Regulator has issued a Notice of Consultation on robocalls spoofing STIR/SHAKEN

[Tony Rutkowski <[e-mail]>]

Hi Richard,

The idea is for you and others to file their comments
in the consultative proceeding rather than use mine
as a template.  :-) <please take a sigh or two>

Two things are remarkable here.

One is that the E.164 identifier system and infrastructure
exists pursuant to ITU-T standards, and that organization
has not found it necessary to adopt STIR/SHAKEN for
the PSTN infrastructure as an applicable specification.
Nor apparently has any industry operators organization
or national regulatory authority anywhere in the world
even in the face of this matter being a global problem.

The matter was, of course, raised at the 2 June 2014
workshop held at the ITU-T, and further study has been
planned for the upcoming Study Period.  See attached.
The STIR work does get included in the gap analysis
along with other competing group approaches.  It is not
clear at this point which solutions will be favoured, but
it seems very premature for any regulatory authority to be
proceeding before some stability or consensus emerges
as to appropriate solutions globally.

Two, there is nothing to prevent any provider or group of
providers today from moving ahead with STIR/SHAKEN
or anything else they choose.  Providers don't need to run
to the FCC or CRTC and get them to bless your favorite
platform that you and your colleagues have produced and
make it part of the Code of Federal Regulations or otherwise
designated as the solution in a FCC Order.

--tony

ps. Given this problem has gone on for the past two decades
a couple years more to innovate and devise better solutions
doesn't seem like a stretch - especially when it's not clear
that your favorite platform will make any significant improvement.

On 2017-02-04 4:59 PM, Richard Shockey wrote:
>
> <sigh>  I guess I need to chime in here again since I posted the 
> original message.
>