In article ,
Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:49:35 -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote:


Nope. The owner of the 800 number is paying for the call. The only way
they can tell if they're paying the correct amount is if they know where
the call is coming from.


I see the logic to that - no argument. I guess my complaint is that the
phone company doesn't make that clear when someone opts for blocking.

They sell "CallerID", and "CallerID blocking".

CallerID blocking does _exactly_ wht it says it does. blocks the delivery
of _CallerID_ information.

Would you expect, if you have CallerID blocking on, that '911' would
_not_ get your phone number?

See, you _already_ knew that 'callerID blocking' doesn't block *all*
delivery of your phone number. *BIG* grin

You're just 'surprised' because there are *more* exceptions than you
_thought_ there were.

You 'jumped to a conclusion' without hard facts. The telco doesn't
tell you that 'callerID blocking' isn't effective when calling 911,
but you already -knew- that that was the case. The telco doesn't
tell you about other exceptions, and you _assumed_ that there weren't
any. with the usual result of 'ass-u-me'ing anything.


Toll-free number owners have _always_ gotten the "calling number", even
before either ANI or "CalleriD" *existed*. In the old days, they got
it, on paper, in the bill at the end of the billing cycle. ANI was a
'minor' enhancement, that simply provided the information in 'real time'.

I'd have to check, but I _believe_ that ANI _predates_ 'CallerID". In
it's traditional form, it was available *only* if you have full-blown
digital trunk lines (i.e., a "T-1" or above), delivering calls to
_your_ switchgear. There _used_ to be a few "CLECs" (competing local-
exchange carriers -- not the 'incumbant, the former 'ma bell' company)
who offered ANI delivered via callerID technology for folks with _small_
toll-fre operations. I don't know if anybody _still_ does that.

In
fact, I called the phone company to ask why my number wasn't blocked and
was told they had no idea. Hopefully, that was because of a single
employee's ignorance, not a company policy.

Did you explain you had 'callerID blocking' *AND* were calling a toll-free
number? If yes, you did get a poorly informed front-line service rep.


The telco's _are_ very careful as to what they say -- in their marketing,
etc. -- about callerID and callerID blocking. Part of it is what they
say, and part of it is what they _don't_ day. And they _are_ careful
to always say that 'callerID blocking" blocks the delivery of CallerID
info. That people who _have_callerID_ will not get your number.

Those who got your number in the past, *without* having callerID, can,
will, and *do* get your number _in_the_same_way_, today. Without
callerID.

'CallerID' blocking was implemented to provide the _same_ degree of 'privacy'
that was available *before* 'callerID' was available 'to the masses'.

It does -not- provide *complete* privacy/anonymity, and you won't find
anything in the telco literature promising that it does. -- if you *that*
is what you want, use a pay phone.