As I was contemplating the issues of +1 14 dialing with IoT having to use all 14 digits to identify and sometimes dial, it occurred to me that IoT voice alerts are going to be an interesting convergence point. It also occurred to me that certain companies may have a competitive advantage.
On the other hand, the FCC can make this problem go away by how they implement the pending policy.
Here is the issue as I see it and I am happy to hear rebuttal from the industry. The vast majority of IoT Cellular connections use Internet solutions for addressing the endpoints but, in some cases, like asset tracking, outbound voice calls and SMS messages are sent either from the endpoint directly or via a gateway that generates a voice call and text to a select list of interested parties about the asset. Asset tracking is one of the oldest and largest markets in IoT.
Now come the policy issues. Is an IoT solutions provider allowed to buy regular dialing phone numbers specifically for these outbound calling requirements, or will they have to send them to the network from their +1 14-digit phone numbers?
If the answer is they have to use the new numbering scheme, it then will have to be verified by STIR/SHAKEN solutions. Since STIR/SHAKEN was adopted to cope with Caller ID spoofing, the question is what methodology will be available for the solution providers to certify their numbers and participate in the flow of information? This is already a problem for many ITSPs without bringing IoT into the mix, as they have tried to be compliant using solutions in the market only to have the traditional carriers override their certifications. In addition, the carriers are very tight-lipped about how they are implementing STIR/SHAKEN and no industry forum (to my knowledge) has been adopted to enable a reconciliation between the legacy PSTN and the ITSPs.
This would mean that the carrier will send the call with the identification of “SPAM RISK.”
Now on to part two. What will the SS7 network do with a 14-digit number coming from a +1 country code? I am not sure what the answer here is. In some states, we still have smaller seven digit dialing formats. I believe they have implemented SS7 to accept 10-digit dialing. I am not sure what it took to implement that ability, so I am curious if this is a simple adjustment or a massive upgrade to the system.
I think our better angels would make an exception to the rule and allow the ITSPs to use regular phone numbers – but maybe not. When I think about the companies that can help with this, I come up with a small list of companies like iConnectiv, Ribbon Communications, and Somos, that could help either with gateways or new systems to amend the flow to make it work. I can also imagine MSPs that provide outbound alerting as gateway service to IoT ITSPs, probably with varying degrees of success and getting through STIR/SHAKEN but masking the SS7 problem.
One thing that has been said to me is that there is no stomach in current politics for this to be a government paid-for problem, when it comes to +1 14-digit dialing. However, I think the SS7 issue may be a chink in the armor, as it would be enabling those rural states to get the upgrade.
One thing about uncertainty, it makes for policy delays, and I am hoping this article represents enough questions to assist in clarifying these issues before the policy is implemented.
Edited by
Erik Linask
