CRTC denies Iristel request for caller location ID manipulation to be outlawed

The CRTC has denied an order requested by Iristel Inc. after it found that Rogers Communications Inc. “did not grant itself an undue preference with respect to the circumvention of call routing restrictions”. The regulator's decision was released on Thursday in response to a Part 1 application Iristel filed in July 2020. In its application, Iristel alleged that between May 14, 2020, and June 7, 2020, Rogers engaged in a scheme to circumvent routing arrangements between local exchange carriers (LECs) which it said would “allow Rogers to benefit from termination rates that are more advantageous than those they would otherwise pay to Canadian LECs by routing Canada-to-Canada traffic domestically.” The claims against Rogers were alleged to have been a violation of Section 36 of the Telecommunications Act which states that “a Canadian carrier shall not control the content or influence the meaning or purpose of telecommunications carried by it for the public” except “where the commission approves otherwise.” As a result, Irisitel requested that the commission issue two orders; one to prohibit Rogers and other carriers “from manipulating caller location identification (CLID) information in order to circumvent call routing restrictions” and another order directing carriers to “include clauses in their contracts with downstream carriers, which route calls from the originating carrier, that prohibit manipulation of CLID information.” In reaching its decision, the CRTC found that the whole incident resulted from the actions of one of Rogers’ long-distance service providers (LDSP) and had a “modest financial disadvantage” for Iristel and potentially “modest gains” for Rogers. It also noted that Rogers “followed prompt and reasonable steps to address the issue” after the matter was brought to its attention. Iristel stated it came across the issue when a Rogers subscriber who was “physically located in the Vancouver area and was not roaming” called into an Iristel conference bridge (while also using a Rogers phone), but with a number that displayed as originating from New York, NY, and registered to Verizon, according to its Part 1 application. “He was not aware that his caller ID information was not displaying his own telephone number,” the company further stated. “Iristel investigated its call data records and noted that starting 14 May 2020, there have been hundreds of calls, and tens of thousands of call attempts originating from (the New York number).” Iristel told the CRTC it was unable to trace the calls further than its own upstream providers. It was allegedly able to confirm that “at least some” originated from a Rogers wireless subscriber after the man identified himself to Iristel and provided his real number. The commission did not receive any interventions on the matter and Rogers did submit a response to the application stating to the CRTC that it “was unaware of what had happened until after Iristel filed its Application.” Rogers noted that the customer in question was “probably” an Iristel employee and happened to be a Rogers business customer. The person allegedly had an Iristel email address and contacted Rogers’ business for technical support after the matter “Rogers neither granted nor received any benefit or advantage – let alone an undue or unreasonable one,” the company stated. Rogers also noted that when it investigated the issue, one of its LDSP’s said it experienced network issues and had carried out network testing in late May 2020, “which involved changing the originating telephone number to a telephone number with a 212 area code, including on the call referenced by Iristel in its application,” according to the CRTC submissions. The LDSP allegedly rectified the issue on June 7, 2020, and as a result, during its review, the CRTC issued a request for information asking Iristel if it observed similar calls originating from the telephone number in question the day after the LDSP allegedly stopped changing the originating telephone numbers. Iristel responded that it did not have data for this time period, according to the CRTC’s written decision. “Iristel’s RFI response also stated that although it had tried to identify other potential spoofing issues, it had no data in its call data records to indicate that any other CLID information modification occurred involving any telephone numbers other than the one in question.” In regards to the orders that Iristel requested the CRTC to issue, the commission found that “Iristel did not provide any distinct arguments in either its application or in its reply comments in support of this request.” “The commission notes that it has not received complaints from any other TSP regarding CLID information modification attributed to the actions of any carrier’s downstream LDSP,” it stated in its decision, “The commission is therefore of the view that ordering (Rogers) and any other carrier to include a clause in their service agreements with their LDSPs specifically prohibiting CLID information modification as a consequence of this proceeding and in response to this seemingly isolated incident is unnecessary.” -- Reporting by Jenna Cocullo at jcocullo@thewirereport.ca and editing by Hannah Daley at hdaley@thewirereport.ca

CRTC denies Iristel request for caller location ID manipulation to be outlawed

News | May 6, 2021

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

CRTC denies Iristel request for caller location ID manipulation to be outlawed

News | May 6, 2021

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

CRTC finalizes terms of Uvagut TV distribution

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

CRTC announces changes to Broadband Fund

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us