Page 1 of 1

Outbound Caller ID Blocking Issue

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 11:57 am
by mjv5864
Yesterday, I placed a call and dialed *67 and the number. The lady on the other end said, "Oh, I see you are calling from Connecticut". I'm not sure if she saw the # but shouldn't is say Restricted or Unavailable?

Any ideas?

Re: Outbound Caller ID Blocking Issue

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 12:15 pm
by southsound
It depends. If you were calling an 800 or 888 number - or law enforcement, CID blocking does not work. For law enforcement, the reasons are obvious. For the toll free numbers, the telco's figure that since the recipient is paying for the call, they need to have the CID information available.

Re: Outbound Caller ID Blocking Issue

Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 9:26 pm
by iSEPIC
mjv5864 wrote:Yesterday, I placed a call and dialed *67 and the number. The lady on the other end said, "Oh, I see you are calling from Connecticut". I'm not sure if she saw the # but shouldn't is say Restricted or Unavailable?

Any ideas?
Businesses can pay to have the number displayed, even if it isn't a toll free number you're calling, google voice being one of them (you can block the last caller, even if the # was blocked). Anyway, and unfortunately, Ooma will display their outgoing pop #s when dialing toll free numbers which show realtime CNP (or ani converted to caller ID, whatever) - instead of your ooma number. Some folks will notice this when calling certain credit card companies, or other businesses that want your phone # to partially identify you. A good test number is 800-444-4444, which normally will read caller ID (unless it is bogus then read the ani) - but in the case of Ooma it always displays their 565 #, instead of my Ooma number. There are technical ways Ooma can correct this (Google voice will properly spoof the caller ID to your google voice number - and yes, it is spoofing, since we share Ooma's switch(es) and they have their own #s (similar to a hotel switch if you will).