1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

So whats the official word on IN Calling and Caller ID Blocking

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Jason, May 15, 2005.

  1. Jason

    Jason Guest

    HI,

    I am wondering if there has been any official change from verizon wireless
    about IN Calling and Caller ID Blocking. I heard for a while there might be
    charges between VZW customers if Caller ID Blocking was used or the caller
    ID displayed Private Caller.

    Anyone know if it is now considered IN Calling even though there is a caller
    ID Block?
     



    › See More: So whats the official word on IN Calling and Caller ID Blocking
  2. Steve Sobol

    Steve Sobol Guest

    Jason wrote:

    > I am wondering if there has been any official change from verizon wireless
    > about IN Calling and Caller ID Blocking. I heard for a while there might be
    > charges between VZW customers if Caller ID Blocking was used or the caller
    > ID displayed Private Caller.


    It shouldn't be. It's a BS excuse. If it's a Verizon cell phone, Verizon will
    always know that it's a Verizon cell phone, regardless of whether Caller ID is
    passed or not.

    --
    JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

    "The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
    --New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"
     
  3. Steve Sobol

    Steve Sobol Guest

    Dapper Dave wrote:

    > "I am happy to answer your question today regarding caller ID &
    > IN-Network calling. If your caller Id is not working or you have it
    > blocked you will not get the benefits of IN-Network calling (formerly
    > known as mobile to mobile).
    > Sincerely,


    It's bad enough when you get nickeled-and-dimed by a cell carrier.

    It's ten times as bad when that carrier is the most expensive carrier in the US.



    --
    JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

    "The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
    --New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"
     
  4. CharlesH

    CharlesH Guest

    Steve Sobol wrote:
    > Jason wrote:
    >
    >> I am wondering if there has been any official change from verizon wireless
    >> about IN Calling and Caller ID Blocking. I heard for a while there might be
    >> charges between VZW customers if Caller ID Blocking was used or the caller
    >> ID displayed Private Caller.

    >
    > It shouldn't be. It's a BS excuse. If it's a Verizon cell phone, Verizon
    > will always know that it's a Verizon cell phone, regardless of whether
    > Caller ID is passed or not.


    It used to be real simple: if a call was handled entirely internally by
    the VZW network, they gave you the "mobile-to-mobile" discount, since
    they did not have to pay anyone else to handle the call. But now, either
    or both of the VZW phones can be on some roaming partner, and they still
    give the discount, so they cannot just rely on the call being handled
    internally.

    Well, they could use ANI (automatic number identification), which is
    used by the system for long distance billing, and cannot be blocked or
    forged. But they apparently chose to use CLID for IN-calling. This can
    be verified by forwarding your landline to your VZW phone, and calling
    your landline from another VZW phone. To the caller, this will be billed
    as non-IN (they called a non-VZW number). But it will be billed as IN to
    the called VZW phone, since the CLID will be that of the original VZW
    phone, even though the call was routed to the landline system and was
    forwarded back to VZW. The ANI on a forwarded call would show the
    forwarding phone, not the original caller.

    What is **SO** bogus about this VZW claim about blocking is that CLID
    info is carried across the phone network regardless of "blocking".
    Blocking is just a bit in the info which tells the last switch not to
    send the info to the end-user's phone. But the system has the info. It
    was done this way so landline features like selective call blocking
    (blocking calls from particular numbers), call return (call last number
    which called me), and distinctive ringing (different ring tones
    depending on whose calling) would work even if the caller blocked the
    CLID. The only time the info would not be available is if some system in
    the chain from the caller to the called phone did not support CLID, but
    this results in "Out of Area", "Unavailable", or such, not "blocked" or
    "private". This rarely happens any more, and is not under the control of
    the caller. So VZW has the info in the case of a blocked call; they just
    use it as an excuse to get the otherwise-free call into a billable category.
     
  5. Steve Sobol

    Steve Sobol Guest

    CharlesH wrote:
    > Well, they could use ANI (automatic number identification), which is
    > used by the system for long distance billing, and cannot be blocked or
    > forged. But they apparently chose to use CLID for IN-calling.


    *sigh* Another reason not to use VZW.

    They're a frickin phone company; they should know better. I'll check my Sprint
    contract, but I don't think Sprint requires me to unblock caller ID to make
    PCS-PCS calls work, and I'm sure no other carriers have a similar rule.

    > What is **SO** bogus about this VZW claim about blocking is that CLID
    > info is carried across the phone network regardless of "blocking".


    Indeed. It's carried; just not shown by the Caller ID device.

    > the caller. So VZW has the info in the case of a blocked call; they just
    > use it as an excuse to get the otherwise-free call into a billable
    > category.


    It's disappointing to see them nickel-and-dime people like this when people are
    ALREADY paying a premium to use their network. Greed sucks.

    --
    JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

    "The wisdom of a fool won't set you free"
    --New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle"
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?