Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!killer!vector!telecom-gateway From: paul@unhtel.uucp (Paul S. Sawyer) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Calling Party ID Suspension Message-ID: Date: 14 Mar 89 19:32:13 GMT Sender: news@vector.UUCP Organization: unhtel.UUCP == UNH Telecommunications Lines: 30 Approved: telecom-request@vector.uucp X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.uucp X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 91, message 2 of 5 Patrick, I am basically in agreement with you on this. For those who feel a need not to be identified to those they call, how about: 1. A per-call code (#xx, or some such) which would encode the calling number for that one call, and/or a chargeable service where an encoded I.D. would be the default 2. The encoded I.D. could be mapped to the caller's number BY THE TELCO on request of the callee (for cases of harrassment, etc.) or IMMEDIATELY upon request of an emergency center operated by a public safety agency (fire, police, etc.) 3. The Telco would keep records of these I.D. maskings for a long enough time so that any question of abuse on either side could be proven (so the lawyers can get their unfair share...) 4. The encoded number of such a call should be displayed, and should be distinctive enough so that anyone who did not wish to receive an "anonymous" call could choose not to. As the New Hampsha fahma (New Hampshire farmer) told his dinner guest, as he ignored the many rings of the newly installed telephone, "I paid good money to have that thing put in for MY convenience - not theirs." -- = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Paul S. Sawyer uunet!unh!unhtel!paul paul@unhtel.UUCP UNH Telecommunications Durham, NH 03824-3523 VOX: 603-862-3262 FAX: 603-862-2030