North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Denial of service attacks apparently from UUNET Netblocks
On Tue, Oct 07, 1997 at 06:20:01PM -0700, Dalvenjah FoxFire wrote: [ David Lesher:] > > Just want to make sure all parties here do not think ANI == CNID. > > They are different critters. You get CNID usually. Real time > > ANI is available on 800 trunks, but at a cost. > > I realize this is probably something one learns in Telco 101, which I > haven't taken, but if CNID == Caller ID, wouldn't ANI be *more* useful? Sometimes. CNID bounces around with forwarded calls, as was pointed out to me in private mail earlier today, whilst ANI will be from the _last_ site in a forwarding chain -- since that's the only place an INWATS subscriber is paying for a call from. > Or does CNID report the number regardless of Caller-ID blocking on PRI > lines/etc? No, CNID is Caller-ID. Blocking is _supposed_ to be implemented by the _terminating_ end office. If you receive your traffic over dedicated trunks from an IXC, rather than a LEC, you're not _supposed_ to get it... but I'd be unsurprised if some IXC's get this wrong. I _would_ be surprised if many LEC's were blowing this. > (I'm assuming that CNID == standard Caller-ID as it appears on POTS, and > that ANI == the special service that 800-lines get that *always* reports > the number, regardless of blocking..if I'm wrong, I'll accept the LART.) You assume correctly. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth [email protected] Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "People propose, science studies, technology Tampa Bay, Florida conforms." -- Dr. Don Norman +1 813 790 7592
|