Brian West wrote:
It will always contain the number. Its the far ends responsibility to honor the privacy flags. The same happens on a PRI as far as I have seen. Nobody should have the ability to withhold that info from your "switch".
That's not quite the case. In the good old world, there was generally a fairly clear distinction between users and carriers. Caller ID would be passed between carriers with the privacy flags set or not as required, but, if it had been withheld by a caller, would not then be delivered to the end user. Otherwise you're essentially giving it to the end user and asking them not to peek, which isn't terribly secure. Nowadays, if I want to withhold my CLI, I don't send anything. That works pretty well. Don't put junk in - I know that I can't call various destinations over BT if I use something bogus (like na, or thiscliisaloadofoldbollocks[1]); I get a 403 Forbidden back. --Dave [1] "bollocks" was once defined on Wikipedia as "the Swiss army knife of andrological profanities" - unfortunately, like most excellent stuff on the word's most comprehensive Star Trek factsheet encyclopedia anyone can ruin, that particular gem's been edited out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollocks is still worth a read, though.