[asterisk-biz] ANI

[Trixter aka Bret McDanel]

On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 16:25 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 09:57:08PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 15:43 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > > When calls are dumped into the PSTN, they *have* to have valid ANI; too
> > > much of the semantics of the entire remainder of the PSTN depends on it. 
> > 
> > That is not true, ANI is not used for routing or billing of the call,
> > the BTN (billing telephone number) is used for billing.  Now some
> > carriers use the ANI for intercarrier compensation, but that is not
> > something that matters on the PSTN itself, and to that end phantom
> > traffic can exist even with valid ANIs (traffic that is enough to
> > complete the call but not enough to properly bill carriers for that
> > call).
> 
> Unless I'm very much mistaken, ANI is a *delivery method*.   BTN is a
> *label for a subscriber service* which is *delivered via* ANI.
> 

ANI is an informational element, how that is transmitted would rely on
the delivery method.  


> So your assertion doesn't actually make a lot of sense.
> 

It makes sense if you properly understand that ANI is information, a
phone number for example, and not a delivery method, sip for example.

  
> If I am, let us say, an INWATS subscriber who is paying the bills for
> calls delivered to me by an IXC, then what I get is indeed the BTN for
> each call, and *how I get it* is via ANI.  
> 
ani and btn can be different and in some instances they are.  As a
result if you are getting ANI informational elements you may or may not
be getting the BTN.


> It's more important, of course, if I'm a transit IXC, moving a call
> from one LEC to another: What I get had *better* be a Billing Telephone
> Number, because that's what I'm gonna do with it: I'm gonna bill it.
> 
well you also get other bits of information, after all the BTN is just
an informational element of the call.  That information may be the ani,
callerid number (sometimes name in some circumstances, that is much more
rare at the call setup stage, normally name is a query made by the
terminating company).  

> 
> I don't see that my assertion there was at all difficult to understand.
> 

no its not difficult to understand, its just based on flawed information
as a result its not accurate.  ANI is not a delivery method, its an
informational element.  That little difference changes a lot in what you
claimed, such as below.


> > Case and point the federal government will often send calls out onto the
> > pstn with a ani and caller id of 0000000000, which is less than valid.
> > This disproves assertions that it has to point somewhere valid.
> 
> Nope, it proves that US federal government agencies often break (or,
> less often, are exempt from) lots of laws and regulations, often to the
> detriment of precisely the people those laws were designed to protect.
> 
> And the common usage is "case in point"


Uhh, you forgot to quote where you said it was required to point
somewhere valid for the call to go through, which is false it does not.
The fact that the federal government may or may not be violating some
rule does not even come into question when I was addressing your
assertion that it has to point somewhere valid or the call cant go
through.

You have changed from saying its required to point somewhere valid for
the call to route to saying that its a delivery method as opposed to an
informational element.  I would suggest that you stop changing your
argument from one thing to another when assertions such as those are
challenged.  It makes you look like you dont know what you are talking
about, and given that this is a business list it may make it difficult
for you to market yourself should you desire to do that.  Just a little
friendly advice, take it or leave it.


Thanks for correcting me on case in point vs case and point.  I will be
sure to credit you for that, you are correct in that singular point, it
is case in point.  My apologies for mistyping a common phrase.

-- 
Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com     Bret McDanel
Belfast +44 28 9099 6461        US +1 516 687 5200
http://www.trxtel.com the phone company that pays you!