- VoiceOps - lists.voiceops.org

Identity Header Test Tool
by paul＠timmins.net July 6, 2022

July 6, 2022

An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20220706/8673295e/at…>

1 0

SHAKEN testing services
by nathana＠fsr.com June 29, 2022

June 29, 2022

Is there a list somewhere of third-party SHAKEN testing services available to the public? Although our own STI-VS can validate our own PASSporTs signed by our newly-minted private key, I want to verify what the world at-large is seeing before I flip the switch on for all outgoing calls (& potentially cause a bunch of problems if it turns out that something's wrong). So I'm envisioning something along the lines of a phone # one can call, and then get a report back of whether the terminating provider was able to validate the contents of the Identity header or not, and if not what the exact problem is. (Obviously the path between us and them would need to be IP end-to-end unless out-of-band SHAKEN is in place for the PSTN "glue" circuit.) I've found a couple, but the results for the ones I've tried (e.g., IDT BYOC) are woefully simplistic and don't really explain what went wrong if something does go wrong. Thanks, -- Nathan

5 9

STIR for intra-net calls
by nathana＠fsr.com June 28, 2022

June 28, 2022

What's the consensus on signing calls that don't leave your own network? Are operators bothering with this, or generally only computing & attaching PASSporTs to calls that terminate off-net? Thanks, -- Nathan

6 8

anyone from charter ?
by igoldstein＠telego.net June 26, 2022

June 26, 2022

Anyone from charter that can reach out to me? off list is ok i am facing an issue with VoIP/SIP pockets from my datacenter to a specific IP are not making it to the destination, 1 HOP before the Default gateway sends the packets to another destination perhaps ? -- Izzy Goldstein Chief Technology Officer - DevOps Master Main: (212) 477-1000 x 2085 <(212)%20477-1000> Direct: (929) 477-2085 Website: www.telego.com <http://www.telego.net/> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this e-mail in error please notify us immediately by email reply and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of TeleGo (T). Employees of TeleGo are expressly required not to make defamatory statements and not to infringe or authorize any infringement of copyright or any other legal right by email communications. Any such communication is contrary to TeleGo policy and outside the scope of the employment of the individual concerned. TeleGo will not accept any liability in respect of such communication, and the employee responsible will be personally liable for any damages or other liability arising. TeleGo Hosted PBX <https://youtu.be/DaT8YAZ4V0w>

2 2

Devices that may violate NDAA
by peeip989＠gmail.com June 22, 2022

June 22, 2022

*' Sec. 889(a)(1)(A) required the federal government, as of August 13, 2019, to not ?procure or obtain or extend or renew a contract to procure or obtain any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunication equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system.?' * I am curious how you're handling CPE (i.e. handsets), for which you are responsible, that are already in the field that is from, *or contain components* (more pertinent to our situation) of the prohibited manufacturers (Huawei, ZTE, Hytera, Hikvision, and Dahua). Are you notifying customers? Replacing or recommending replacement? Handling differently for private enterprise than for the government? Thanks, Pete

1 0

Peerless issues this morning
by dovid＠telecurve.com June 20, 2022

June 20, 2022

Anyone having issues with SIP traffic to Peerless? We had an issue where it seems that they were not getting any of our 200 OK', ACK's etc. With most of our ISP's the packets were not flowing. With one smaller upstream carrier which uses L3 upstream it is working. Peerless NOC answered and told me they had a network issue in Chicago and that's about it.

1 0

Comcast rejecting port requests for 4 months
by aaron＠heyaaron.com June 16, 2022

June 16, 2022

Hey everyone, We have a large SIP trunk with Comcast with around 275 numbers attached. We've been trying to port about 200 of those numbers to another provider for the past 4 months to do some geeky things that Comcast doesn't support. Due to reasons only known to Comcast, there are 5 different account numbers vaguely associated with those phone numbers and I keep getting wildly different answers from Comcast staff. One is for the EDI circuit. One is for the AdTran. One is for the SIP Trunk One is for "master billing" One is a "hierarchy account" The winning carrier has submitted the requests with every possible combination of account number and 'CPNI code' (Comcast's account PIN) we have along with all our addressing information, copies of bills, etc...and Comcast keeps rejecting it with zero useful information. i.e. bad address, bad PIN, bad account number, etc... Every time I even mention "porting out" to a Comcast rep, they say "FCC regulation prevents us from talking about it". The winning carrier has had so much trouble, they finally sent me the "port order number" and said "call Comcast and talk to them about it. Good luck." Of course calling the Comcast porting number gives you a short recorded message about "due to COVID, use some portal click". I'm technically a contractor for the end-user and not a phone service provider, so I don't have access to whatever portal they are talking about. It's been absolute hell. Any thoughts on how I can get Comcast to get their crap together? I've never had so much trouble porting numbers away from a carrier. -A

8 14

SIP Trunk Failover
by calvin.ellison＠voxox.com June 11, 2022

June 11, 2022

If your SIP trunk provider were to offer failover, would you prefer to configure that failover per DID/TFN or for the entire SIP trunk? Failover might include another number, an IVR, voicemail, a ring group, another SIP trunk, a voice reject, or something else. Calvin Ellison Systems Architect calvin.ellison at voxox.com +1 (213) 285-0555 <http://voxox.com> <https://www.facebook.com/VOXOX/> <https://www.instagram.com/voxoxofficial/> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3573541/admin/> <https://twitter.com/Voxox> The information contained herein is confidential and privileged information or work product intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately.

6 6

iNum and UN numbers via ex Voxbone now Bandwidth
by compuwizz＠gmail.com June 10, 2022

June 10, 2022

I believe the iNum project was shutdown by Voxbone before Bandwidth bought them, but I didn't see anything about the UN +888 country code numbers that Voxbone hosted also. They used to be reachable via ENUM but I'm not seeing records for them anymore. Does the UN range exist anymore? I do see the destination listed in some vendor rate sheets with varying pricing from normal to astronomical. The test numbers I have don't complete. FWIW I also see the iNum range +8835100 in rate sheets. ~Jared

3 2

STI-CA average pricing
by nathana＠fsr.com June 8, 2022

June 8, 2022

Starting to collect quotes for SHAKEN cert signing from STI-CAs, and got our first response back. I also got whiplash at the same time. Although I didn't have to sign an NDA or agree to any kind of confidentiality in order to get this response, since nobody seemingly wants to publish their pricing, I will (at least for the time being) keep both the quote itself as well as the vendor name close to my chest. But...dang. Though I'm hoping to be surprised, I'm guessing that there isn't a wide difference in pricing between various STI-CAs. Can people here confirm that I'm likely to mostly hear same-y figures from others? Or if there are options that are significantly cheaper than others, who do y'all recommend that I should be talking to? Note that I'm only talking about the CA component as a standalone offering, though I'll observe that with very few exceptions, it also doesn't seem like too many vendors are either willing to unbundle the CA service from their overall "end-to-end cloud-based SHAKEN" products, or if they are, they seemingly don't like to publicize it. To put my response to this pricing in context, we are a relatively small regional broadband provider, and voice is a fraction of a fraction of our business. I'd wager just about everyone else here has a larger voice subscriber base than we do, and most of you probably didn't blink when you saw the price-tag on what it would take to become part of the STIR/SHAKEN ecosystem...just the cost of doing business, right? We do have effective CLID anti-spoof already & have since the beginning, and as a small provider, we also were *supposed* to have another 12 months to get up to speed on all of this and start signing calls...at least, that was the case until the FCC moved that timetable up in what I can only describe as a Darth Vader-esque "altering [of] the deal". We didn't get that memo in December but only about 3ish months ago, and it's not like I don't have plenty of other things to do, so I'm already coming into this project plenty pissed off... *sigh* Anyway, I can see that the gate-keepery-ness of this industry is still alive and well. Though I can understand wanting to keep out the riff-raff, you would think that all of the hurdles that one needs to clear in order to get this far -- getting an OCN, on-boarding with the STI-PA, etc. -- would be enough without also throwing yet another huge mandatory & ongoing expense on top of the pile as well. Sorry. Didn't mean for this to turn into a rant, but...ugh. -- Nathan Anderson First Step Internet, LLC nathana at fsr.com

6 9