| > I would really love to hear a telecom engineer explain why the true origin info isn't accessible to the called person. A telephone call is a two-way connection -- the path in both directions must be known otherwise you won't have a two-way conversation. Telephone isn't really like IP routing. If D wants to call P, the connection might get set up like this: D -> K -> H -> V -> P
P only knows that they are speaking to V, and D only knows that they're speaking to K.See what happens is D sends a message called "Call Request". This creates a channel id (D,C1) between D->K. K will then create it's own "Call Request" with it's own channel id (H,C2) which tells H to bill K for this call. Only K will know both the channels C1 and C2 and will bridge them internally. When H makes a "Call Request" to V, it has it's own billing arrangement with V and they agree to simply count calls, so H doesn't actually forward anything except the channel id (nil,C3). V gets away with this because the wire is clearly marked with "K TELEPHONE INC". Eventually P gets an "Incoming Call" message with it's channel id (P,C4), and can accept the call or reject it. If he accepts it, then each party will send "Accept Call" messages back down the chain. These channel ids are used to actually carry the phone call (or data packets, or whatever). "Caller ID" isn't the "source of the message", just some data transmitted along with the ringing sound, and as you can see the circuit doesn't have a globally unique identifier. If someone doesn't transmit who to bill, then nobody will get billed for that call (and maybe nobody will be!) but V doesn't want to send bills for this call all over the country so V only sends bills to a few carriers and its own customers. All the bills have the "correct calling numbers on them" because of some extra billing data that's included in the call. This billing data might be omitted (the bill says "NUMBER BLOCKED"), and it clearly isn't required to establish the call. People can ask their phone company to ignore calls that have a blocked number. Phone companies used to trust each other not to spoof this information, and now that calls from certain numbers aren't usually billed differently than from any other numbers, this doesn't cause a problem with billing -- only with people who seek to use "making a call from" an authentication method. |
The companies could enforce the side channel info as the actual call origin, but they don't want to. Just like snail-mail spammers they're paying more money than residential customers will pay to require that info.
It's broken because it serves the purposes of the phone companies to keep it that way. This is what you get by detaching profit from ethics.
I'd settle for my phone company dropping calls with spoofed caller ID - like 0, my own number, foreign calls with local numbers, local numbers that don't even terminate, etc..
Indeed I think origin should be legally required even if it's "K phone network" - I don't mind blocking all calls via companies that service spammers.