Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: riot!slr@csvax.caltech.edu Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Using the "O" Operator to Defeat 800 ANI and Caller*ID Message-ID: <9481@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 5 Jul 90 16:54:22 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: "Steve L. Rhoades" Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 29 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 468, Message 5 of 8 When calling an 800 number from my Pasadena, CA exchange (818-794 - 1AESS), I have found that I can prevent the called party from receiving my number simply by routing the call through the "O" operator (Pac*Bell's TOPS). Normally, when I call one of MCI's, SPRINT's or AT&T's 800 numbers, my number will show up on the called party's call detail. If I simply Dial "O", and "have trouble reaching 800-xxx-xxxx" the call detail doesn't have my number. (Yes, the TOPS operator does have it.) I've only tried this with the above-mentioned 800 providers. My question: Is this just a fluke ? Is there some type of convention for TOPS to pass the calling number to the 800 service provider ? Has anyone else tried this ? Does it work elsewhere ? On a related question: For those of you with Caller*ID, what happens when you get a call routed through the "O" operator ? (the called party being someone that you would normally get a calling number from on your Caller*ID display). Steve US mail: Post Office Box 1000, Mount Wilson, Calif. 91023 UUCP: ...elroy!cit-vax!riot!slr Internet: slr@riot.caltech.edu voice-mail: (818) 794-6004