SKASS@drew.bitnet (Steve Kass) (02/22/91)
Maybe this has been asked before, but I've been wondering how it is that businesses get inter-LATA ANI already. It's not coming for years to residential customers, it seems, so if American Express (or whoever) knows the number of the caller in real time, how do _they_ get it, and why can't I? A related story: I tried to get verbal ANI from 201-514 by calling 211, 311, etc., and got "Sorry, the # ..." until I got to 711. After 10 rings a voice answered "Emergency, 911." Strange. But stranger yet: we don't have 911 at all in these parts. I don't really want to call back and bother whoever answered. Any guesses out there? Steve Kass/ Math & CS Department/ Drew University/ Madison NJ 07940/ 2014083614/ skass@drew.edu [Moderator's Note: They get inter-LATA ANI for the same reason I get it: They have an 800 number. When you are paying for the calls you get told who you are paying for. If you accept a collect call, the operator will tell you what number is calling also, if you ask. PAT]
collins@epsl.umd.edu (Bernard F. Collins) (02/22/91)
In article <telecom11.148.6@eecs.nwu.edu> SKASS@drew.bitnet (Steve Kass) writes: > [Moderator's Note: They get inter-LATA ANI for the same reason I get > it: They have an 800 number. When you are paying for the calls you get > told who you are paying for. If you accept a collect call, the > operator will tell you what number is calling also, if you ask. PAT] Interesting. I tried the ANI demo 800 number after I had blocked Caller ID for my call using *67 which C&P just implemented. No change. They ID'd my number just the same. Are normal LD calls ID'able outside of Maryland when I use *67? Skip Collins, (301)792-6243, collins@wam.umd.edu [Moderator's Note: It is not that calls are ID'able outside of Maryland, but rather, that you misunderstand what *67 will and will not accomplish. Under the assumption that a call is otherwise ID'able -- that the serving CO knows your number and is able to pass it along one way or another to the other end -- admittedly a big assumption until inter-LATA transfer of this information is universal -- then what *67 (or whatever your blocking code is) does is instructs the serving CO thus: "If the recipient of the call subscribes to Caller*ID then do not pass this information to him." Period. *67 does not permit you to avoid passing your number to the CO itself, to an operator handling your call or to the billing equipment. Although both ANI and Caller*ID deliver your number to the recipient of the call, they are technically different functions. *67 only addresses the Caller*ID aspect of it. The act of passing your number to the recipient of an 800 call is actually ANI, not Caller*ID. ANI is not without it's flaws: It passes the billing number sometimes, an otherwise irrelevant DID trunk number at other times, etc. But it is almost 100 percent universal throughout the USA. Caller*ID is not. PAT]
gast@cs.ucla.edu (David Gast) (03/05/91)
> [Moderator's Note: They [AMEX] get inter-LATA ANI for the same reason I get > it: They have an 800 number. When you are paying for the calls you get > told who you are paying for. If you accept a collect call, the > operator will tell you what number is calling also, if you ask. PAT] With the price of the AMEX card, it's hard to argue that the customer is not paying for the call; regardless, the topic of ANI for 800 numbers is open to some disagreement. It is possible, however, that the poster was refering to some large organizations that have ISDN and that get ANI information as part of that feature. Several PUCs, I think Washington's among them, have ruled this service illegal -- at least at the present time. I don't know if ISDN ANI is available in GTE land, but I called the local branch of a national organization that has been reported in the digest to have ISDN and about 10 days later I got an application to join. (As part of the application, I agree to abide by all by-laws and regulations although none of these is specifically mentioned. Obviously, I did not sign up). Of course, the junk mail have just been a coincidence.