dcurrey
Premium
join:2004-06-29
 ·ViaTalk
2 edits | Bad CID Numbers?
Just got a call from Time Warner wanting me to buy more crap. The number only showed up as 111 VT CP showed it as 1111. This has been mentioned before with strange 3 and 4 digit numbers coming up. Something about misconfiguration PBX or something.
It would be nice if VT had a setting to automatically block/route/voice-mail numbers that don't follow correct patterns. Full 10/11 digit numbers. Something similar to the way "Anonymous call block" works. |
|
ViewSonic Jon
@verizon.net
| This note may help. VT is using old, outdated CID list. They didn't have recent up to date CID list which they may have to buy it from other carriers.
Hello,
It's certainly possible that we use different caller ID databases. Unfortunately at this point there is nothing we can do to change your incoming caller ID.
_
Thomas Ryan
ViaTalk Support |
|
k2rj
Premium
join:2005-03-24
Solon, OH
·ViaTalk
| There have been quite a number of threads having to do with these 4-number CID strings, one dating back over a year ago on the Sunrocket forum. The CID database has nothing to do with the number strings that are sent (or allowed to be sent) by the originating callers phone company or system. It only attaches a name to a number.
Sone newer (private) PBX systems default an extension number as the CID number sent both internally and externally. I found this out when we upgraded to a new phone system at work. Each record in the PBX's database had to be edited to add the correct CID number - not a trivial task with a large number of extensions!
It seems that some telemarketers also found a way to spoof 4-digit CID's to get around anonymous call blocking. |
|
dcurrey
Premium
join:2004-06-29 | reply to ViewSonic Jon
I have differently seen outdated info come in on CallerID. Reverse phone lookups show the same as VT. They must be using the same outdated db. This was something else however. Just number no names has happened in the past. |
|
