Spam calls are a bl*ddy nuisance and worse, but they're not easy to block.
Jeff says 'The phone company could stop all these crap calls if they wanted to.' and Peter says 'I've maintained for years that the telcos' computers know exactly in which country all calls originate and they could therefore offer their customers the option to block certain countries.'
Unfortunately, these beliefs don't coincide with how the telephone system works. It's a packet switching network, not a point-to-point physical connection between two handsets identified by unique telephone numbers. In the good old days telephone numbers really were physically related to the wiring, now they're mostly labels, not used for routing or any other technical purpose. Bad guys can put any phone number they like on the call-id, and it costs him nothing. Phone numbers are untrustworthy.
In the past, telephone networks had their own infrastructure. Not now. Telephone conversations share the same general network infrastructure as the internet and data communications of all kinds. In terms of traffic volume, the telephone system is a minor player, just one data service amongst many. The advantage of sharing is cheap reliability; local, long distance and international calls cost very little, which also opens the door to abuse.
The system works something like this:
- You dial a number on your phone which is converted to a network address by the exchange. What you say is digitised and sent as a stream of thousands of individually addressed packets. The provider simply charges by call length and destination type.
- Each packet is loaded into a sub-network. A simplification, but the sub-network routes by directing packets with an address it recognises to a device (such as a telephone exchange), and if that fails by forwarding them to another sub-network. Each sub-net does the same until the packet's destination address is recognised.
- The way packets are routed means the network sends packets by any combination of available pipe. If the preferred transatlantic fibre link becomes busy, the system automatically routes with another one or by any available satellite. Users are unaware that their conversation is split into fragments and each fragment can travel by a different route.
- Provider pay backbone network suppliers a bulk rate for data, not individual calls. At the receiving end, there isn't much notion about where the call came from other than it's 'International' or 'Regional'. The system is analogous to the way magazines are distributed postally. Thousands of mags in pallets are handed over to the Post Office. The Post Office opens the pallets and distributes each magazine by whatever route is convenient. This probably includes bundling for transfer abroad, where another Post Office handles delivery to the customer, by whatever means he has available. Multiple couriers and shipping arrangements are used.
The upshot is the world gets cheap phone calls and I can browse the world's websites for free. The downside is it's difficult to filter out nuisance phone calls. Inventing a straightforward way of blocking them would be worth big money, but it's beyond me! It requires much closer examination of network packets than a telephone exchange can manage. Possibly in the next generation: phone providers are pushing hard to get rid of the 'POTS' (Plain Old Telephone System), replacing it with end-to-end IP telephony.
The traditional telephone exchange, carrying data communications as a sideline, is disappearing in favour of a network data switch supporting telephony as a sideline. When the inversion is complete, it might be possible to manage unwanted calls, because an IP phone can apply the same sort of technology used to control computer viruses and email and browser abuse. And we all know how well that works…
Dave