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

  • From: David Lesher
  • Date: Wed Oct 08 00:35:12 1997

Dalvenjah FoxFire sez:
> > Just want to make sure all parties here do not think ANI == CNID.
> 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?

They came up from different requirements; using different

> Or does CNID report the number regardless of Caller-ID blocking on PRI
> lines/etc?
> (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.)

ANI is a BILLING number. Call an 500/800/900# line & that is what
they see.  Ex: All 5280 lines at Engulf and Devour will report
the main billing number of 666-7836.

CNID is the calling number. {IN THEORY} even in a large system
[university] the calling number /"extension" appears. But... often
times there are PBX's with outgoing-only trunks {Why? a history of
crude signaling schemes, mostly...} that even if they do ring in;
they end up somewhere else than you intended...

ANI is not blockable. CNID is. The block can be ignored by the
final switch, however, if you are "privileged" enough. And if you
want to spend the $$ [i.e. Fort Meade..] you get dedicated outgoing
trunks that don't pass SS7 at all.

A host is a host from coast to [email protected]
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433