Webinar recording — STIR/SHAKEN in France

STIR/SHAKEN call authentication has been mandated in France. Compliance deadlines will be here soon. This webinar will review the requirements, provide an overview of the French STIR/SHAKEN call authentication ecosystem, and present the TransNexus STIR/SHAKEN solution for France.

Agenda

  • Robocall mitigation requirements
  • Robocall Mitigation Database certification and plan filing requirements
  • STIR/SHAKEN requirements for non-gateway intermediate providers
  • Questions and answers

Presenters

Jim Dalton

Jim Dalton
Chief Executive Officer
TransNexus

Marc St-Onge

Marc St-Onge
Customer Success Executive
TransNexus

Slides

Here are the slides used in the webinar presentation.

Questions and answers

We’ve summarized and consolidated questions we received during the webinar and provided answers here. Contact us if you have further questions.

What’s the policy regarding third-party signing?
A third party can authenticate calls on behalf of an originating provider. However, the third party must use the originating provider’s SHAKEN certificate and determination of attestation level.
Here in the U.S., we prefer to take the calling number from the FROM header. Is that the case in France?
This is a technical difference between SHAKEN in the U.S. and in France. In France, the calling number is in the FROM header. However, the calling party might hide the calling number so the FROM header is anonymous or unavailable. In this case, the French technical documents specify that the originating provider should include a P Asserted Identity header with the the calling number. In this case, the terminating provider should use the callling number in the P Asserted Identity header for SHAKEN verification.
Does the Attestation Level definition (A, B, or C) differs between North America and France?
It is exactly the same. In fact, the French technical documents refer to the ATIS documents in regards for this.
Would our USA STIR/SHAKEN attested calls be acceptable when making international calls to France?
At this time, the answer is no. There’s no obligation to do that, and in fact in the documents published by the regulator, it’s specifically stated that support for PASSporTs generated out of France is left for a later date, so it’s not excluded, but at this time, no.
In the US, verification frequently fails because of number normalization where E.164 format is added or stripped from the SIP INVITE. Is there a concern about blocking starting October 1st?
The telephone number must be in E.164 format, without the plus. It must have the correct number of digits and so forth. Otherwise, the verification will fail.

Transcript

Here’s a lightly-edited transcript of the webinar presentation.

Jim Dalton [0:04]
We’re going to wait just a few more minutes for or just a few more seconds for a few other people to get connected and we’ll start shortly.
OK, great.
I think we’ve got a full house now, so let’s go ahead and get started and we’re going to be talking about STIR/SHAKEN and France.
I’m Jim Dalton and with me is Mark St-Onge. I tell you, we’re fortunate to have Mark here. We’re fortunate to have Marc with TransNexus. He’s really been leading our effort in France to provide SHAKEN services and Mark has done a great job and it’s really interesting to hear.
So, how are the French handling SHAKEN what they’ve done, what they’ve implemented and compared to what’s going on in the US. They had the benefit of starting a little bit later and seeing what was implemented in the US and Canada.
And I think they learned from what we implemented.
So, I think they have a I think they have a good system in place and we’ve been serving customers there and it’s a well.
I’m excited about, you know, how SHAKEN is unfolding in France.
So anyway, Mark, I’m glad you’re here and you’re at Mark is a bona fide telecom expert. I just have to say that he is an expert on what’s going on in France. And so, this is going to be a great webinar for everybody.
Just a little bit about TransNexus.
You know, we have we been in the business since 1997, selling software to telephone service providers, routing optimized routing fraud controls, things like that, and SHAKEN and robocall mitigation compliance has become a big factor for us.
We’re going to be talking in this Webinar, completely focused on France, so if you have to drop off, if you can’t stay on the call, you can send a question to us.
It TransNexus these slides are going to be available in the TransNexus website is as well as the recording, but if you have any, you know plans or your company might be expanding into Europe and you need help with your SHAKEN implementation of France or just have questions, feel free to contact us and we’ll be glad to share with you everything we know.
So, I’m going to stop there and let Mark proceed and lay out the agenda and tell us about how SHAKEN works in France.
So, Mark please.
Marc St-Onge [2:37]
That’s great, Jim. Thank you for the introduction. I appreciate it and thank you.
To everyone for attending and participating in this Webinar, I’ll say we have maybe about 30-minutes’ worth of presentation. Depends on questions that you may have, and here’s the agenda for the presentation today.
I’d like to present the ecosystem.
You know the players in France are different, but similar to those in the USA.
Then, I’d like to present the deadlines service providers in France are facing and at the same time it allows me to present how what the French regulator is doing to fight unwanted calls.
I’m going to present the requirements service providers need to meet to comply with STIR/SHAKEN in France, and I’m going to present key differences of what France is doing when deploying STIR/SHAKEN.
And finally, at the end, I’m going to present our product called NexOSS, which supports STIR/SHAKEN in France.
Before I start with the content like to say that if you have questions, please type in your questions in the Q&A panel, not in the chat, during the webinar and at the end.
And if there are questions, we’ll be happy to answer those.
So, let’s get started.
And so, the ecosystem in France involves the regulator, industry associations, the APNF.
And the way it’s implemented it in France, it involves what’s called a MAN platform down here, which is key in the deployment of stir SHAKEN in France.
So, what are these different players in the ecosystem?
Well, similar to the United States, you know, the STIR/SHAKEN deployment in France begins with legislation in France.
It’s called Loi Naegelen, which is similar to the TRACED Act in the USA, aims to fight.
Illegal robocalls and these calls, which often use automatic dialers, initiate scams vishing.
Bad actors use it to impersonate other brands and those of you who live in the United States.
I’m sure you’ll get harassed quite often with unwanted robocalls. Well, it’s happening in France as well and the regulator is the government has decided to act with, put in place a lot.
And what it does is it causes the regulator last step here, which is similar to the FCC.
To put in place. Regulations in France to implement STIR/SHAKEN and other things as well, and I’ll mention those in a moment.
And what they did at last step is they mandated the APNF. Association de la Portabilité des Numéros Fixes.
Then you may go fix to implement STIR/SHAKEN and so what they did with the participation of FFT over here, which is an industry association similar to what we have in the USA in the USA, they’ve put in place regulations.
They produced quite a large number of documents which cover, you know, the technical aspect of how STIR/SHAKEN is deployed in France. Exactly what service providers need to do, and most importantly, puts this in place.
This MAN platform, which I’ll be talking about later on in the presentation, it’s really a web based platform which issues certificates, manages the certificate repository, and importantly and differently from what’s happening in the US and Canada is it collects statistics and is a platform where service providers can report incidents and requests tracebacks.
So, this is the ecosystem, in France and the result is I think a very clear path for service providers on how to implement stir SHAKEN in France.
Let’s have a look at some of the key dates in the deployment of STIR/SHAKEN in France and, more generally, the fight against illegal robocalls in France.
So, the first step was this legislation, Loi Naegelen, which was put in place in July 2020. And the first thing it required was three years later to have the regulator put in place special number blocks for automated dialers.
And Jim, I find this is very interesting.
I put here the acronym in NVP, so there’s a specific block of telephone numbers.
NPV stands new stands for Numéros Polyvalents à Vocation, and the idea behind this is that if you’re using an automated dialer, you’re calling number must be part of this number block, such that if you receive a call and the caller ID is displayed and you see that the calling number is part of this number block, you can decide to answer or not. But one thing you do know is that it comes from an automated dialer.
I mean, it could be totally legitimate. But at least you have this information, and you can decide if you want to answer or not.
You may even recognize the calling number and you know it’s, you know, an appointment reminder from your dentist or from someone else.
So, I thought that was interesting.
It gives information to the called party you know about who’s calling.
Second thing you know, three months later, last year beginning in March 1, 2023, the legislation specifies when telemarketers can initiate their outbound calls on which days at which time you know on those days and how often in a period of 30 days that I read, they can call the same customer or they can call the same prospect.
And if I remember correctly, it’s like they can call a maximum of four times in 30 days, and the days are, you know, Monday to Friday and the times are during the time of day during which these calls can be made is well defined.
Finally, coming to the subject here of this webinar is STIR/SHAKEN.
The initial date was at the end of July last year, but it was delayed because many French service providers weren’t ready. And so now the new date is June 1st which is Jim like in seven days. All service providers in France must have deployed STIR/SHAKEN.
And what’s more is that they must report authentication statistics to the MAN platforms, such that the regulator can evaluate how the deployment of STIR/SHAKEN is going throughout France.
And I have more information on these statistics and later on in the presentation and later on this year, October 1st, the French actually planned to block calls based on STIR/SHAKEN.
And I have later on in this presentation the exact conditions under which calls can be blocked.
And so, we’ll go through that and in this slide, here I present a list of requirements. I’ll say it’s not exhaustive, but it’s the most important requirements.
French service providers need to comply with the regulation in France and you know, some of them are a more obvious than others, but they need to register on the MAN platform, they need to update their leadership or ownership changes. And this concerns the leadership and ownership of service providers. But I will say this is similar to what’s going on in the USA.
You know, with the need to register with the policy administrator in the USA and IT service providers in the USA need to update their ownership in the robocall mitigation database. So far this is similar.
They need to implement the attestation guidelines that are published and very thoroughly explained in the French technical documents.
They need to block calls when the regulator requires that they block calls and you know this is later on this year, in October 1st, they need to upload statistics to the MAN platform and I’ll tell you more about that later on in the webinar.
This this is very interesting subject, and they need to maintain a list of SIP interconnections on the MAN platform so they actually log in and list their SIP interconnections, identifying which other provider they’re interconnected with, and identify whether STIR/SHAKEN has been deployed on that interconnection.
And of course, like in the USA, they need to promptly respond to traceback requests in the next section I want to provide a brief overview of STIR/SHAKEN, but before I go there, Jim, I want to ask do you do you have a comment or a question, something you’d like to add?
Jim Dalton [14:34]
So Mark, yeah, I just wanted to point out a couple of things that you noted.
It’s really interesting that the debt, the fixed dial string for automated calls, that is very interesting.
A clever way to make people consumers know what the call is coming from.
I think that’s kind of a novel idea, but anyway, and there’s some other things, but let’s wait till the end.
Mark, this is really it’s getting good, and I don’t want to slow it down with my comments.
Marc St-Onge [15:00]
OK, let me get going.
Thank you very much and this section want to provide a brief overview of STIR/SHAKEN.
I think you know like can’t present without providing an overview of the protocol or the mechanism.
So, what we see on this slide up here is the MAN platform, OK, which is this web-based platform that the regulator has put in place, it issues certificates to service providers such that they can authenticate calls, it acts as the certificate repository for service providers who are verifying inbound calls.
So, all service providers in France, you know must use what’s called an authentication service to authenticate the route bound calls and must use a verification service to verify inbound calls before they present them to the called party.
So, what we have here is a caller on the left obtaining service from an originating service provider who’s initiating an outbound call to a called party here on the right-hand side the call flow goes like this. It’s not different from what it is in other countries.
There’s a call set up from the calling party to their service provider.
The service provider uses the authentication service to generate a PASSporT and we’ll have a look at a PASSporT token in a few slides just to make it very practical for everyone.
What is authentication?
This PASSporT is inserted into the outgoing invite to an intermediate provider in an identity header, which is included in the signaling in the invite to the public switched telephone network.
In this case here you know the path to the PSTN is the intermediate service provider. The intermediate service providers role is to carry that identity header unchanged towards the downstream, which could be more intermediate service providers, but ultimately reaching a terminating service provider who will receive a SIP invite with the original identity header in it.
It will use its verification service to verify the signature in this identity header and finally present the call to the called party.
So, this is the same call flow that we have in North America. Nothing is different there.
Let’s have a brief look at what is a PASSporT, what is an identity header in the next two slides here is to make it very practical for everyone.
Here is a sample SIP invite which would be issued by the originating service provider.
It includes an identity header, this identity header.
It’s value, what it transports is, you know, a BLOB of characters which is encoded, which encodes a PASSporT token, and it also carries a URL where the certificate can be obtained from the terminating service provider to verify the signature in this encoded token.
If we decode the BLOB of characters, that’s there, we find the following information.
There is a calling telephone number.
There is a called telephone number.
There is a level of attestation which can be a, B or C and there is a timestamp.
The idea of this PASSporT token is for the originating service provider to say.
Here’s the calling number I am issuing this call with and according to the attestation level here, there’s originating service provider is saying I have a direct relationship with the party originating this call, and I know they are entitled to use this calling number. That is what attestation level A means.
So, when the terminating service provider at the other end receives this invite, decodes the token, verifies the signature using the certificate, it reveals this calling number.
This called telephone number and the level of attestation and it compares that to what’s found in the signaling in France in the from header, which is the calling telephone number and in the two header which is the called telephone number and if they match and the attestation level A is a, the call is deemed to be verified and it is then presented to the called party.
So, this is very practical fashion is you know what a STIR/SHAKEN is.
Now let’s have a look at how the implementation of STIR/SHAKEN is different in France than it is in other countries such as the USA and Canada.
And there are many differences, but I’ve selected three key differences which I will present now.
So, the first key difference is that in France we plan to block calls based on STIR/SHAKEN.
The first place in the call chain where the call can be blocked is by the intermediate service provider and it’s very clear in the regulations in France that if the intermediate service providers receive an invite with no identity header or if the identity header is malformed, the intermediate service provider should block this call.
Similarly, the terminating service provider receiving a call receiving an invite.
Should a must I’ll use the term must block the call as well.
If there’s no identity header, it’s so the call is not authenticated, must block the call if the signature in the passport token is invalid and if verify.
Finally, if verification fails, you know I’ve mentioned that the ideas we decode the token, we get the calling called number and we check against the signaling.
If they match OK.
And so, this is implemented for, we’ll be implemented for all calls unless it’s a call to an emergency number or if the originating service provider here on the left is we say, disengaged.
And this is the subject of my second key difference.
But before I go there, I’ll say in France at this time this call blocking is not happening.
Currently the date on which French service providers need to start blocking calls is October 1st.
Let’s move on to key difference #2 which is, in French STIR/SHAKEN, there’s a way for French service providers who have for which they’re authentication service is down or under maintenance and you know it can happen.
There’s a way for them to identify to downstream providers that they’re not in a position right now to authenticate outbound calls, and this is you can imagine in relation to call blocking.
So the first thing for them to do is they access the web portal on demand platform, obtain what’s call, what’s called a disengagement token, which is, you know, it’s defined what it is, but it’s a certain value which identifies them as an operator as the originating operator, and then a certain value which uniquely identifies in the token and what they do with this is insert it in the outgoing invite.
Then you header called the P asserted identiy header.
So, what we have in invite is P asserted identity.
This token inserted in the invite and what this tells downstream providers is that I’m not able to authenticate calls at this time. Please do not block my calls.
Just you know, if even if there is an identity header, you know, just ignore it, and don’t block calls.
I’ve had some French service providers bring this up and say oh what a great way you know to get around the system and avoid calls being blocked.
But they key thing is here is that you know a disengaged service provider needs to access the portal and they need to report they are disengaged, and the regulator sees that, and every other service provider sees that too.
So, what I’m quite sure it won’t be abused.
Third key difference I’d like to present is and that all service providers in France need to report statistics to the MAN platform.
And it’s quite interesting what they need to report.
The first is about calls that are blocked and blockable calls.
They must report on calls they have blocked or calls that they have not blocked but were blockable I among other things before this key date of October 1st, you know, and calls are not being blocked until that date.
But there are calls that are blockable and they need to be reported, and this is reported daily, and the regulator is very clear as to what information needs to be reported on these calls.
So, in this file that is, you know, FTP to the MAN platform, they need to identify themselves.
They need to say if they’re an originating provider, an intermediate provider or terminating provider, they must say from which provider they receive this call from.
They give information on calling and called numbers, although the numbers are anonymized.
Are the telephone numbers a fixed line?
A mobile line and what was the situation?
Did I not block this call because it was called to an emergency number?
Did I not block the call because the originating service provider was disengaged and there’s more information as well, but I am not going to get into details here.
Finally, they need to upload statistics weekly about all calls.
They get OK, and in fact there are 17, plus 19, different statistics they need to provide a weekly and what they need to provide is the number of calls.
So how many calls?
How many outbound calls did they issue in the past week for which the calling number was a mobile number?
How many were using a fixed calling number?
How many were anonymous?
And there are many, many other details.
Similarly, they need to report on inbound calls.
How many calls used a mobile number fixed number?
How many calls got attestation A how many calls got attestation B&C and more like that?
The idea of these statistics is for the regulator to keep an eye on the deployment of stir SHAKEN in France.
I think you know, if I was in their place, I’d like to see a ramp up.
You know, I’d like to see all these millions of calls come in and I can view this using these statistics.
There’s a third part to this as well.
The MAN platform provides a place where operators can open tickets and report issues.
And they can, for example, effectively request a traceback.
And the way the ticket is put on the platform, it’s the service provider is opening a ticket and it’s directing the ticket toward another provider, and it may say you sent me a call with attestation A. But you know, the calling number was invalid. You shouldn’t have done that.
You’ve blocked some of my calls and you shouldn’t have done that, and so it’s platform to resolve issues and once again the regulator has an eye on this because this information is available to them on the MAN platform.
So that was the section about the key differences of STIR/SHAKEN in France versus what we know in the USA and what we know in in Canada.
For your information, the United Kingdom is also considering deploying STIR/SHAKEN and Brazil as well.
So, and you know, I think it’s the message is STIR/SHAKEN I think is here to stay and it’s going to be adopted by.
By different countries more and more, let me say something briefly before I stop and we go to questions or gym if I ask, I ask you if you have a comment or something to add.
The TransNexus Product for STIR/SHAKEN in France is called NexOSS. NexOSS is software that’s deployed on-premises. It consists of two parts, NexOSS software and OSPrey software. It interfaces with the MAN platform, which I’ve mentioned a number of times. It interfaces directly with the equivalent of a certificate authority in France, the GCO, and it interfaces with the BPCO you know the GCC O is a Certificate Authority which allows French service providers to obtain certificates, and the BPCO is the certificate repository which allows French service providers to obtain certificates for from other service providers in order to verify call.
What’s more, NexOSS interfaces with a database, and in this database the software logs the data, records the data needed by French service providers to report blocked and blockable calls, as well as statistics to the MAN platform.
The way it works is as you can see down here is OSPrey is the software which is in in the call real time. It’s a SIP redirect server, so in this what’s shown here is the treatment of an outbound call.
So, for an outbound call for a French service provider to the PSTN, the soft switch or SBC in their network sends an invite to Osprey, and Osprey provides a SIP response.
It could be a 300 response.
It could be a 404.
It could be a 603 or 4 ** responses STIR/SHAKEN response to block a call OSPrey never sends it 200 OK, we’re using the SIP protocol here to perform a call treatment and finally you know in an authentication call an identity header is sent to the soft switch and SBC and its job is to include it in the outbound call to the PSTN.
So NexOSS is deployed in France, and it supports French STIR/SHAKEN.
That’s the message of these slides and we be glad to help you deploy STIR/SHAKEN in France.
We are knowledgeable on a STIR/SHAKEN in France, and we can help you comply with the French regulator’s requirements.
So, Jim, I’ll stop there and see if there are any questions or maybe if you want to add something that would be great.
Jim Dalton [34:40]
Yeah, Mark, I did and that was fantastic. Thank you for going through all of that.
And they are definitely a few comments I want to make.
I’ll save those for the end because we have some good questions and you know so one, one question that came in is so you pointed out the calling number comes from the from header and you know here in the US we prefer to take the calling number from the PA Asserted identity header if it’s present is that the case in France or not the case.
Marc St-Onge [34:52]
The case in France and I’ll use the term normally the calling number is taken from the from header.
OK, that’s one of the differences that I didn’t present.
It’s a technical difference between STIR/SHAKEN and North America and France.
So, you know what an originating service provider will take the calling number from the from header and include that in the authentication in the token that goes out the very the terminating service provider.
We’ll verify the call using the telephone number in the front, but it may happen, and it does happen that the call is anonymous, right?
The calling party is hiding the caller ID so the front header has anonymous or unavailable. In that case, it’s specified in the French technical documents that if that happens, the service provider should include a P Asserted Identity with the calling telephone number with another header Privacy set to ID. If I recall correctly. So, in that case, if the from header is anonymous or unavailable, the verification is performed using the P asserted identity header.
And there’s another detail as well there where if the service provider is not including the PC Ward identity header there they must include what’s called a technical number, which identifies them as the originating service provider.
Jim, it’s a little bit like the local routing number in the USA.
You know the LRN they service provider has a technical number and if, uh, if the caller ID is anonymous, you know it may include the technical number in the from header for STIR/SHAKEN.
Jim Dalton [37:36]
Interesting stuff.
Wow, a lot of good details there.
So here’s a question. It’s very practical question.
You know, number normalization SHAKEN has to be based on a calling called numbers.
Based on it, you want E.164 without the plus, but that’s not always what goes across the signaling.
And if you’re a sloppy operator, you know you won’t normalize the numbers in signaling for, for verifying against your SHAKEN passports that you get.
And so, the question has been raised.
Is there concern about that October 1st and for sure there is, but I mean what are your thoughts?
Marc St-Onge [38:14]
Yeah, I I think yes, there is concern you know and.
Number normalization is required, which is just like you said, you know the in the passport token.
The telephone number must be E164 format without the plus it must have the correct number of digits and so on.
And if, yeah, if you’re sloppy, when it comes time, your calls may well be blocked, right? Because verification will fail.
What’s more is I think you know the regulator is got will be gathering statistics or is gathering statistics already since last year actually is gathering statistics and they’re getting the statistics on blocked and blockable calls.
So today they’re getting statistics on blockable calls, and it will allow them to evaluate the concern of turning on call blocking, right if the block calls or block blockable calls are excessive.
Maybe that October 1st, the deadline will be delayed because a there is also a concern in France about this call blocking and what impact it may have on the obligation.
French service providers have to deliver service with a certain quality of service.
You know when you pick up the phone in France, the service providers have an obligation to deliver a service, I’ll say of a high quality, so yeah, there is concern.
Jim Dalton [40:25]
Yeah, that’s interesting.
And I tell you the point of the fact that they’re collecting statistics.
I think that’s one thing that they really have right in France, you know, we’re completely uninformed in the US with how SHAKEN is working or not working.
We all experience the disappointment, It’s not here, but I think they’re really that was a great requirement to collect the data to be able to improve their decisions for public policy.
But anyway, so here’s a question for you.
Hey, Mark will SHAKEN passports signed in the US can they be verified for calls made to France.
So I’ll make a call with my US calling number.
It’s signed by, you know, US service provider and it sent to France.
Could that be verified by a French shaken operator?
Marc St-Onge [41:19]
That’s a very good question. At this time, the answer is no.
There’s no obligation to do that, and in fact in the documents published by the regulator, it’s specifically stated that support for passports generated out of France is left for a later date, so it’s not excluded, but at this time, no.
Jim Dalton [42:01]
So OK, that that makes sense.
You know, it’s just string.
I’ll put this point out if everybody doesn’t know it, but you know Google, Microsoft and a few others, they had an ex parte with the FCC this week on Cross border call authentication.
So I I think the French regulators are leaving that open.
I think it is going to happen and we will have that vision of international SHAKEN working in the future, but it’s not here yet.
So here’s a question, does France allow third party signing?
So we have that here in the US and you know it’s interesting.
France is a very strict intermediate provider.
If they get a call without a passport, they need to block it so they start cleaning up bad calls before they even get out into the network, which is interesting.
Not the US policy.
And in the US and the intermediate provider can sign calls on behalf of their customers.
What’s the policy in France regarding third party signing?
Marc St-Onge [42:58]
Yes, this is a very interesting topic and another key difference of about what’s going on in France versus elsewhere, so.
So third party signing in France is regulated.
It is defined.
It’s clearly defined in the documents.
And the way it’s implemented is that.
A third party signer can authenticate calls and verify calls on behalf of an originating service provider.
Verify calls on behalf of a terminating service provider, but in the case of authentication, they can authenticate those calls, but they must use the certificate of the originating service provider and the originating service provider is responsible for the authentication of these calls.
It boils down to the originating service provider.
Is purchasing a service from an intermediate service provider for the authentication of their outbound calls, but they must have their own certificate and they are responsible for the authentication rules, meaning which calls are being authenticated, or which calls get attestation level A which calls get B&C and they are responsible for the authentication versus the regulator, even if it’s a third party which is signing their calls.
Jim Dalton [44:53]
Interesting. You know, I I think that’s a great. rule. It makes so much sense I think the French got that one right there, holding every OSP accountable. They’ll put their signature on that call and it certainly improves the analytics dramatically.
That kind of policy, that that’s interesting. That’s good to hear.
And so we have one question as far as attestation AB&C is it the same in France as it is in the US? The attestation levels?
Marc St-Onge [45:24]
It is exactly the same. And in fact, Jim in fact, Jim, the French technical documents referred to the ATIS standards for that.
Jim Dalton [45:29]
Thank you for that clarification.
Well, Mark, this has been fantastic.
You know you’ve been involved with SHAKEN from the, you know, the very first deadline last year and you’re feeling some urgency for customers to meet this deadline next week.
So you know it’s anyway, it’s been great.
You’ve done a great job over there.
I’m excited about, you know, what the French the thinking they brought to this.
This is a worldwide problem and it’s a hard one to solve and every time somebody joins, you know the process and add some value with a new ideas and implementations.
It’s something we can all learn from, so if there’s some things here that we get brought back to North America.
So anyway, Mark that this has been fantastic.
Thank you everybody for joining.
If you have any additional questions, feel free to reach out to us.
Will be happy to discuss it with you and that’ll wrap up our webinar for now.
So thanks again, Mark.
Marc St-Onge [46:38]
Your very welcome.
Thank you for everyone for attending. I appreciate it. Have a nice day!
a woman using her phone while standing at Montmatrtre in Paris

About TransNexus

TransNexus is a leader in developing innovative software to manage and protect telecommunications networks. The company has over 20 years’ experience in providing telecom software solutions including toll fraud prevention, robocall mitigation and prevention, TDoS prevention, analytics, routing, billing support, STIR/SHAKEN and SHAKEN certificates. For more information, visit transnexus.com.

Contact us today to learn how we can help you prepare for the FCC robocall mitigation deadline.

Request information

* required

This information will only be used to respond to your inquiry. TransNexus will not share your data with any third parties. We will retain your information for as long as needed to retain a record of your inquiry. For more information about how we use personal data, please see our privacy statement.