Perhaps I wasn't clear. As I said, we must be able to transport this information. For instance, the caller-id information must be able to be transported to the edge of the network if required. Even if the caller-id presentation restriction is present. Maybe in a real network the requirement will be to NOT transport it. That is up to the carrier. Not us. At 10:33 AM 5/14/99 +0100, Chris Purvis wrote:

Matt,

With respect, what implementations do IS our business - at least to the extent of ensuring that it should be clear from the standard how to implement something that is both sensible and compliant. Several problems in the implementation of standards (and, worse, inoperabilities between implementations of the standards) have arisen from contributors to standards bodies NOT considering implementation.

Regards, Chris -- Dr Chris Purvis - Senior Development Engineer, WAVE CC Software Madge Networks Ltd, Wexham Springs, Framewood Road, Wexham, Berks. ENGLAND Phone: +44 1753 661 359 email: cpurvis@madge.com

...

-----Original Message----- From: Matt Holdrege [mailto:matt@ASCEND.COM] Sent: 13 May 1999 6:46 To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: Caller ID legal issues (was: caller ID and implementer's guid e)

All this means is that the protocol must allow flexibility. For example, it must be able to transport the caller-id presentation restriction and caller-id screening indicator. What the implementations do with that is not our business.

At 01:02 PM 5/13/99 -0400, Tom-PT Taylor wrote:

...

I'm not sure about the first, except that many jurisdictions require support of emergency services such (e.g. 911 in North America). There are definitely regulatory jurisdictions requiring "presentation restricted".

...

-----Original Message----- From: Paul Long [SMTP:Plong@SMITHMICRO.COM] Sent: Thursday, May 13, 1999 10:41 AM To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Caller ID legal issues (was: caller ID and implementer's guide)

(I am straying from the original topic, so I changed the Subject.)

This is not a standards-related issue, so we can end this thread if someone objects, but I was wondering about the legal ramifications of caller ID. Are there laws in some countries that require the following, or is it just considered good etiquette and/or a market-driven feature?

Caller ID to be transmitted if provided by the caller

Caller ID not to be displayed to the called party if so requested by the caller ("presentation restricted")

Paul Long Smith Micro Software, Inc.

-----Original Message----- From: Chris Purvis [SMTP:Chris.Purvis@MADGE.COM] Sent: Thursday, May 13, 1999 8:28 AM To: ITU-SG16@MAILBAG.INTEL.COM Subject: Re: caller ID and implementer's guide

Pete,

Just a note about the security matter you mention. Some PC based H.323 endpoints allow one, with just a little knowledge, to persuade them to output debugging which includes all elements of decoded RAS/Q.931-H.225.0/H.245 messages. This is clearly "undesirable" when security of information contained in such messages is required! It also might be quite hard for some people to switch off. I don't have a solution to this: I just raise it as an issue.

Regards, Chris -- Dr Chris Purvis - Senior Development Engineer, WAVE CC Software Madge Networks Ltd, Wexham Springs, Framewood Road, Wexham, Berks. ENGLAND Phone: +44 1753 661 359 email: cpurvis@madge.com