US20110033032A1 - Detecting false answer supervision - Google Patents

Detecting false answer supervision Download PDF

Info

Publication number
US20110033032A1
US20110033032A1 US12/538,384 US53838409A US2011033032A1 US 20110033032 A1 US20110033032 A1 US 20110033032A1 US 53838409 A US53838409 A US 53838409A US 2011033032 A1 US2011033032 A1 US 2011033032A1
Authority
US
United States
Prior art keywords
answer supervision
false answer
provider
distribution
calls
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Abandoned
Application number
US12/538,384
Other languages
English (en)
Inventor
Shuping Zhang
Manpreet Singh
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Ibasis Inc
Original Assignee
Ibasis Inc
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Ibasis Inc filed Critical Ibasis Inc
Priority to US12/538,384 priority Critical patent/US20110033032A1/en
Assigned to IBASIS, INC. reassignment IBASIS, INC. ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: SINGH, MANPREET, ZHANG, SHUPING
Priority to US13/389,585 priority patent/US9203952B2/en
Priority to PCT/US2010/044725 priority patent/WO2011019610A1/en
Priority to EP10762779.6A priority patent/EP2465231B1/de
Publication of US20110033032A1 publication Critical patent/US20110033032A1/en
Abandoned legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04M—TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04M3/00—Automatic or semi-automatic exchanges
    • H04M3/22—Arrangements for supervision, monitoring or testing
    • H04M3/2227—Quality of service monitoring
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L41/00—Arrangements for maintenance, administration or management of data switching networks, e.g. of packet switching networks
    • H04L41/50—Network service management, e.g. ensuring proper service fulfilment according to agreements
    • H04L41/5003—Managing SLA; Interaction between SLA and QoS
    • H04L41/5009—Determining service level performance parameters or violations of service level contracts, e.g. violations of agreed response time or mean time between failures [MTBF]
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L41/00—Arrangements for maintenance, administration or management of data switching networks, e.g. of packet switching networks
    • H04L41/50—Network service management, e.g. ensuring proper service fulfilment according to agreements
    • H04L41/508—Network service management, e.g. ensuring proper service fulfilment according to agreements based on type of value added network service under agreement
    • H04L41/5087—Network service management, e.g. ensuring proper service fulfilment according to agreements based on type of value added network service under agreement wherein the managed service relates to voice services

Definitions

  • Answer supervision occurs when a called party answers the phone, signifying it is time to start billing the call. Answer supervision may be delivered by a simple timer, voice detection or signaling to name a few example mechanisms. False answer supervision (FAS) occurs when a calling party is charged for a call that does not connect or the calling party is overbilled for a call that is actually shorter in duration than billed.
  • FAS False answer supervision
  • An example embodiment of the present invention may be implemented in the form of a method or corresponding apparatus for detecting false answer supervision.
  • the method and corresponding apparatus includes determining for each route an indicator of false answer supervision either as a function of a number of completed calls of short duration and a number of hangups or as a function of a distribution of differences between timestamps of alert signals and timestamps of connect signals used to complete calls.
  • the embodiment detects false answer supervision for a subject route, based on the indicator of false answer supervision so determined by either functions separately or in combination.
  • the embodiment in response to the detecting, affects a decision about the subject route.
  • Another embodiment determines the indicator of false answer supervision as a ratio of the number of completed calls of short duration to the number of hangups. False answer supervision is detected, in an event the ratio of the number of completed calls of short duration to the number of hangups is greater than a threshold value.
  • Yet another embodiment decomposes the distribution of differences into a portion of the distribution and a remaining portion of the distribution. Decomposing the distribution of differences into the portions may be based on, for example, differences that are less than or equal to a time of one second and differences that are greater than the time of one second.
  • the indicator of false answer supervision is a ratio of the portion of the distribution to the remaining portion of the distribution. False answer supervision is detected, in an event the ratio of the portion of the distribution to the remaining portion of the distribution is greater than a threshold value.
  • Still yet another embodiment removes the subject route from being provided for completing calls in response to detecting false answer supervision.
  • FIG. 1 is a signaling diagram of an example callflow
  • FIG. 2 is a network diagram of an example network in which embodiments of the present invention may be employed
  • FIG. 3 is a flowchart of an example process for detecting false answer supervision, in accordance with an example embodiment of the present invention
  • FIG. 4 is chart of a distribution of differences between timestamps of alert messages and timestamps of connect messages
  • FIG. 5 is a block diagram of example apparatus to detect false answer supervision, in accordance with an example embodiments of the present invention.
  • FIG. 6 is a route diagram of an example route in which embodiments of the present invention may be employed.
  • FIG. 7 is an example computer implementing embodiments of the present the present invention.
  • the selection of a particular destination carrier may be based on one or more considerations including the cost of completing the call through the destination carriers, the quality of service offered by the destination carriers, or other considerations.
  • the destination carrier may be selected according to other business rules including, for example, an agreed upon volume or percentage of traffic to be completed through a carrier in a geographic region. For instance, there may be an agreement between a system operator, such as a wholesaler, and the destination carrier that calls for the system operator to make minimum daily/monthly/yearly payments to a destination carrier in exchange for the destination carrier providing a predetermined number of minutes of service.
  • the system operator would want to make sure that the destination carrier is used to place calls for at least the predetermined number of minutes each day/month/year before routing calls to other destination carriers to ensure that the system operator derives the maximum amount of service from the destination carrier in exchange for the minimum guaranteed payment.
  • Business rules taking onto account these and other similar types of considerations could then be used to determine which destination carrier to use.
  • IBASIS a system operator, is one of the largest carriers of international voice traffic in the world. In addition to global voice termination, IBASIS provides innovative mobile data services and prepaid calling services. Through its innovative quality routing and quality management technologies, IBASIS is able to select the best available route for every call. IBASIS Network Operations Centers (NOCs) combine state-of-the-art network management technology with around-the-clock dedicated technicians to ensure the highest quality of service to customers worldwide.
  • NOCs Network Operations Centers
  • False answer supervision causes customers to complain about extra billing of calls, e.g., billing incomplete calls or billing for more time than actually used. Responding to false answer supervision complaints consumes a great deal of resources for system operators like IBASIS. Using information provided by customers in false answer supervision complaints or trouble tickets, false answer supervision can be detected by placing calls to fake numbers that should not connect and seeing if the calls are billed as connected calls. This is reactive false answer supervision detection because detection relies on customers first complaining of a problem. As an indicator of false answer supervision, reacting to customer complaints is wholly inadequate because not every customer complains. Further, false answer supervision tends to be a transient problem, often disappearing before one can react to the problem, only to reappear at a later time and/or location in a system operator's network like the IBASIS Global Network.
  • False answer supervision is not always malicious in nature. Simple network malfunctions, as well as equipment malfunctions and configuration issues, can also cause isolated cases of false answer supervision. For example, false answer supervision may be experienced when there is no synchronization between a voice over internet protocol (VoIP) leg and public switched telephone network (PSTN) leg of a call on a VoIP-to-PSTN gateway.
  • VoIP voice over internet protocol
  • PSTN public switched telephone network
  • the gateway attempts to establish a connection, but due to incorrect configuration, the gateway detects the states of the call that are advertised by the PSTN network (e.g., “called party ringing,” and “called party connected”). In this case the gateway forces the “CONNECT” state.
  • the gateway connects the call and begins billing according to settings for the gateway and not according to the actual state of the call.
  • False answer supervision is even harder to detect proactively because some vendors of routes (i.e., vendors or service providers that complete calls from customers to destinations) only apply fraud-based false answer supervision to a small percentage of traffic or calls. There are also services available to vendors to exploit false answer supervision and increase their profits.
  • One such service stimulates calls to numbers that are out of mobile network coverage and provides false billable airtime to a calling party. This service pretends to be a real mobile carrier and plays back real mobile carrier service messages (e.g., “the number you are calling is not reachable at the moment, please, call back later”) while charging the calling party.
  • an example callflow 100 from a calling party 105 to a called party 110 illustrates signaling-based answer supervision.
  • the calling party 105 and the called party 110 exchange signals or messages 115 to set up a voice path or call between themselves.
  • the exchanged signals 115 are session initiation protocol (SIP) messages, but could also be H.323 messages or messages of other signaling protocols.
  • SIP session initiation protocol
  • the “200 OK” SIP message in particular, marks a time to start billing the calling party 105 .
  • the calling party 105 experiences a false answer supervision problem and is erroneously billed for a call when the called party 110 is still ringing or when the calling party 105 still hears an announcement play (e.g., network announcement or message of “your call cannot be completed as dialed”), even when the call is connected with the “200 OK” message present in the callflow 100 .
  • the calling party 105 also experiences a false answer supervision problem and is overbilled for a call when billing starts at the “200 OK” message present on the callflow 100 when the called party 110 has still not answered the phone. After the called party 110 answers the phone and talks for some time, the calling party 105 is overbilled.
  • the calling party 105 may experience a false answer supervision problem for a number of reasons, including fraud.
  • a false answer supervision detector 200 is communicatively coupled to a network 205 that has routes 210 a . . . 210 d (generally 210 ) for completing calls by customers 215 to destinations 220 a . . . 220 d (generally 220 ), such as the area codes 1978, 1781, 1508, and 1617.
  • One or more service providers or vendors provide the routes 210 .
  • a first vendor and second vendor may both provide the route 210 a to the “1978” destination 220 a .
  • false answer supervision is a problem that is particular to a combination of vendor and route (referred to also as, vendor/route combination).
  • this disclosure refers to false answer supervision as being for a route, on a route or otherwise as a false answer supervision route.
  • a vendor may provide each portion making up the route 210 .
  • more than one vendor may provide the portions making up the route 220 , in which case, each vendor provides at least a portion of the route 210 .
  • false answer supervision may be for a portion of the route 210 .
  • the route 210 may be characterized by measures, such as number of completed calls, number of attempted calls (i.e., completed calls+hangups), and duration of calls.
  • ASR answer-seizure ratio
  • ASR Average Call Duration
  • the route 210 For carrying calls (voice, fax or data) between the customers 215 and the destinations 220 , the route 210 also carries signals or messages used to complete the calls, such as alerting/ringing signal 225 (e.g., “180 Ringing” SIP message of FIG. 1 ), also referred to as an alert signal, and connect signal 230 (e.g., “200 OK” SIP message of FIG. 1 ).
  • alerting/ringing signal 225 e.g., “180 Ringing” SIP message of FIG. 1
  • connect signal 230 e.g., “200 OK” SIP message of FIG. 1
  • a difference between a timestamp of the alert signal 225 and a timestamp of the connect signal 230 still further characterizes the route 210 .
  • an example process 300 for detecting false answer supervision is executed by a false answer supervision detector, such as the false answer supervision detector 200 of FIG. 2 .
  • the process 300 starts ( 301 ).
  • the process 300 determines ( 305 ) an indicator of false answer supervision as either: i) a function of a number of completed calls of short duration and a number of hangups or ii) a function of a distribution of differences between timestamps of alert signals and timestamps of connect signals used to complete calls.
  • the process 300 detects ( 310 ) false answer supervision for at least a portion of a subject route based on the indicator of false answer supervision so determined by either functions separately or in combination. For example, detecting false answer supervision may be based on a first indicator of false answer supervision together with a second indicator of false answer supervision.
  • the first indicator is determined as the function of the number of completed calls of short duration and the number of hangups.
  • the second indicator of false answer supervision is determined as the function of the distribution of differences between the timestamps of alert signals and the timestamps of connect signals used to complete the calls.
  • Detecting false answer supervision based on the first and second indicators may be used in situations in which false answer supervision is not or cannot be detected with one of the indicators, but is or can be detected with the other indicator. For example, calls of long duration (e.g., 5-10 minutes) that are overbilled by several seconds before actually connecting can be detected using at least one of the indicators described above. This improves the ability of the process 300 to detect false answer supervision.
  • Detecting false answer supervision based on the first and second indicators may also be used to verify or cross-check false answer supervision detection using one indicator against detection using the other indicator. This improves the accuracy of the process 300 to detect false answer supervision.
  • the process 300 affects ( 315 ) a decision about the subject route in response to the detecting ( 310 ).
  • One embodiment removes the subject route from being provided for completing calls in response to detecting false answer supervision.
  • the route more specifically, the vendor/route combination is scrubbed from a routing lineup.
  • Another embodiment reduces a number of calls to be completed by the subject route.
  • the route more specifically, the vendor/route combination may be placed under probation.
  • the process 300 ends ( 316 ) with false answer supervision detected.
  • a convenient embodiment determines the indicator for false answer supervision as a ratio of the number of completed calls of short duration to the number of hangups, also referred to as a call duration-based false answer supervision ratio. False answer supervision is detected if the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio exceeds a threshold.
  • the threshold to which to compare the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio against may be set or otherwise established in several ways as will be described in detail later.
  • the number of completed calls of short duration and the number of hangup are chosen for the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio because a false answer supervision route (i.e., false answer supervision for a particular vendor/route combination) has a high percentage of short duration calls and a low percentage of calls that are hung up by a calling party.
  • the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio measures or otherwise indicates, for example, the ability to hang up a call that cannot be completed.
  • the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio is contrasted with an answer seizure ratio (ASR), which is a ratio of a number of completed calls to a number of attempted calls.
  • ASR answer seizure ratio
  • the answer seizure ratio does not consider the relationship between hangups and calls of short duration.
  • calls of short duration are not represented and separated from other calls (e.g., calls of long duration).
  • calls of short duration are represented and separated from other calls.
  • the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio considers both the duration of completed calls and attempted calls that hung up to remove the “noise” that makes it difficult to detect false answer supervision with the answer seizure ratio.
  • both the number of completed calls of short duration and the number of hangups change simultaneously.
  • the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio may be said to have increased sensitivity and responsivity for detecting a false answer supervision route.
  • the following example illustrates the increased sensitivity and responsivity of the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio over the conventional measures of quality, ASR and ACD.
  • FASR call duration-based false answer supervision ratio
  • a 900% change in a metric is highly distinguishable. As such, the FAS environment can easily be detected using the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio.
  • the false answer supervision detector 200 itself, collects, directly, the number of completed calls of short duration and the number of hangups to determine the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio. Alternatively, the false answer supervision detector 200 collects, indirectly, the number of completed calls of short duration and the number of hangups from other nodes in the network 205 . Whether the false answer supervision detector 200 collects directly or indirectly dictates how the false answer supervision 200 interfaces with or otherwise is communicatively coupled to the network 205 both physically and logically.
  • a convenient embodiment excludes from a number of completed calls, a number of completed calls of long duration to yield or otherwise derive the number of completed calls of short duration.
  • the embodiment further excludes from a number of attempted calls, the number of completed calls to yield the number of hangups.
  • the embodiment collects the number of completed calls and/or the number of attempted calls either directly or indirectly as described above.
  • Another embodiment excludes completed calls with durations greater than a time of 15 seconds from the number of completed calls to yield or otherwise derive the number of completed calls of short duration.
  • a completed call of short duration is defined as a completed call that lasts for 15 seconds or less.
  • a completed call of long duration is defined as a completed call that lasts for more than 15 seconds. This is but one example definition of completed calls of short duration and completed calls of long duration. Short duration and long duration may be defined based on empirical data. For example, research shows that calls that should be hung up, yet are experiencing false answer supervision, do not last longer than some measure of time.
  • completed calls of short duration are defined as completed calls that last no longer than a time that is discovered from research.
  • Completed calls of long duration are defined as completed calls that last for more than the discovered time.
  • Still another embodiment varies sensitivity for detecting false answer supervision by varying the number of completed calls of long duration that are excluded.
  • the embodiment excludes completed calls with durations greater than a time of variable length.
  • the sensitivity varies in response to varying the number of completed calls of long duration that are excluded.
  • FIG. 4 charts a distribution 400 of differences between timestamps of alert messages (e.g., the alert message 225 of FIG. 2 ) and timestamps of connect messages (e.g., the connect message 230 of FIG. 2 ) against a number of completed calls.
  • the difference also referred to as alert-to-connection (A2C) duration, is the time from when a calling party's phone starts to ring (i.e., time of an alert message) to when the called party answers the phone (i.e., time of a connect message).
  • the time of the alert message and the time of the connect message are nearly identical e.g., the difference is substantially zero. It is highly improbable for a phone to be answered as soon as it starts to ring. Usually there is a difference of 2 to 10 seconds from when the phone starts to ring to when the phone is answered.
  • a convenient embodiment decomposes the distribution 400 into a portion 405 and a remaining portion 410 .
  • the embodiment determines an indicator of false answer supervision as a ratio of the portion 405 to the remaining portion 410 , also referred to as a signaling-based false answer supervision ratio.
  • False answer supervision is detected if the signaling-based false answer supervision ratio exceeds a threshold.
  • the threshold to which to compare the signaling-based false answer supervision ratio against may be set or otherwise established in several ways as will be described in detail later.
  • One embodiment decomposes the distribution 400 into a portion of differences less than or equal to one second and a remaining portion of differences greater than one second.
  • Still another embodiment varies sensitivity for detecting false answer supervision by varying the portion of the distribution and the remaining portion of the distribution that are decomposed.
  • the embodiment decomposes the distribution into a portion of the distribution of differences less than or equal to a time of variable length and a remaining portion of the distribution of differences greater than the time of variable length.
  • the time of variable length can be selected empirically because usually false answer supervision (or a false connect signal) starts within the first few seconds after the alert signal. In most cases, false answer supervision starts immediately within 1 second after the alert signal. Setting the time of variable length to another value, such as 5 seconds, enables an embodiment to catch or otherwise detect false answer supervision (or a false connect signal) as long as false answer supervision starts within 5 seconds of the alert signal.
  • the sensitivity varies in response to varying the portion of the distribution and the remaining portion of the distribution.
  • the embodiments may collect the timestamps of alert messages and the timestamps of connect messages directly or indirectly, similar to collecting the number of completed calls of short duration and the number of hangups described above.
  • false answer supervision is detected if the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio, the signaling-based false answer supervision ratio or a combination thereof (described in reference to FIG. 3 ), exceeds a threshold.
  • a false answer supervision ratio generally refers to the call duration-based false answer supervision ratio, the signaling-based false answer supervision ratio, and the combination thereof.
  • the threshold against which to compare the false answer supervision ratio may be set or otherwise established in several ways.
  • the threshold may be set as or set as part of a business rule. For instance, there may be a business agreement between a system operator, such as a wholesaler, and a vendor of routes that the vendor agrees not to provide a route or routes having a false answer supervision ratio that exceeds a threshold. As described previously, because more than one vendor may provide a route to a destination, false answer supervision is a problem particular to a vendor/route combination. Accordingly, for a given route, different vendors can agree to provide the route with a false answer supervision ratio that does not exceed different thresholds. For example, a first vendor agrees to provide the route with a false answer supervision ratio that does not exceed a first threshold. For the same route, a second vendor agrees to provide the route with a false answer supervision ratio that does not exceed a second threshold that is different from the first threshold.
  • Such a route provided by different vendors agreeing not to exceed different thresholds may be offered or otherwise sold to customers as having different levels of assurance of being without false answer supervision or “FAS free.” For example, a customer may pay to make its call with “gold,” “silver,” or “bronze” (or other distinguishing labels) level of “FAS free” guarantee. These levels correspond with a first vendor agreeing not to exceed a first threshold, a second vendor agreeing not to exceed a second threshold, and a third vendor agreeing not to exceed a third threshold. The first threshold is less than the second threshold, and the second threshold is less than the third threshold.
  • the threshold may be set based on false answer supervision ratios from a number of vendors of a particular route, a number of routes of a particular vendor, or a combination thereof.
  • the threshold is set as the mean (or other value that represents a set of values) of the false answer supervision ratios.
  • the threshold may be set to accommodate regional network behavior. Some countries or combinations of vendor and country (or region) (also referred to as vendor/country combinations) exhibit a behavior that is detected, typically, as fraud, for example, not billing for calls that enter voice mail. Different thresholds may be set for different vendor/country combinations to adhere to and not to exceed, rather than assuming all vendors should display similar behavior or tendencies.
  • False answer supervision ratios may be determined over a period of time, such as 30 days. The mean false answer supervision ratio and standard deviation may then be calculated from the collected ratios. False answer supervision is detected if when the current false answer supervision ratio exceeds an upper control limit that is calculated according to a statistical process control method: mean(false answer supervision ratio)+n_sigma*standard deviation (false answer supervision ratio).
  • an example false answer supervision detector 540 to detect false answer supervision includes a detecting unit/module 505 , detecting unit/module 510 , and affecting unit/module 515 , each communicatively coupled from one to another.
  • the determining unit/module 505 determines for each route, an indicator of false answer supervision 506 as either: i) a function of a number of completed calls of short duration 507 and a number of hangups 508 or ii) a function of a distribution of differences 509 between timestamps of alert signals and timestamps of connect signals used to complete calls.
  • the detecting unit/module 510 detects false answer supervision for at least a portion of a subject route based on the indicator of false answer supervision 506 so determined by either functions separately or in combination.
  • the affecting unit/module affects a decision 512 about the subject route. For example, the decision to remove or otherwise scrub the offending route (more particularly, the vendor/route combination) or put the offending route on probation and provide it to fewer customers to use.
  • the false answer supervision detector 500 and its components may be configured or otherwise adapted for the specific purpose of detecting false answer supervision.
  • the determining unit/module 505 is configured to determine an indicator of false answer supervision.
  • the detecting unit/module 510 is configured to detect false answer supervision based on the indicator.
  • the affecting unit/module 515 is configured to affect a decision about a subject route in response to false answer supervision being detected.
  • the false answer supervision detector 500 may be a general purpose computer having a processor, memory, communication interface, etc.
  • the general purpose computer is transformed into the false answer supervision detector 500 and its components, for example, by loading instructions into the processor that cause the computer to determine an indicator of false answer supervision, to detect false answer supervision based on the indicator, and to affect a decision about a subject route in response to false answer supervision being detected.
  • FIG. 6 illustrates an example route 600 to a destination 601 provided by a provider 605 , first downstream provider 610 , and second downstream provider 615 .
  • the term “downstream,” describes a direction towards the destination 601 , away from the provider 605 .
  • the first downstream provider 610 is downstream from the provider 605 .
  • Each of the providers 605 , 610 , and 615 provides a portion of the route 600 . Between the provider 605 and the first downstream provider 610 is a portion 620 of the route 600 . Continuing downstream from the first downstream provider 610 is another portion 625 of the route 600 . The other portion 625 includes the destination 601 , the first downstream provider 610 , and the second downstream provider 615 .
  • An embodiment determines for the portion 620 an indicator of false answer supervision.
  • the embodiment determines the indicator of false answer supervision as either: i) a function of a number of completed calls of short duration and a number of hangups or ii) a function of a distribution of differences between timestamps of alert signals and timestamps of connect signals used to complete calls.
  • the embodiment detects a false answer supervision portion 630 of the route 600 based on: i) the indicator of false answer supervision for the portion 620 , and ii) a result of detecting false answer supervision for the other portion 625 .
  • the result of detecting false answer supervision for the other portion 625 may be generated by a technique different from one used in the present embodiment. For example, false answer supervision is detected in a reactive manner in response to customer complaints of false answer supervision, as described previously.
  • the embodiment then removes the false answer supervision portion 630 from the route 600 .
  • the false answer supervision portion 630 may be the portion 620 based on the indicator of false answer supervision determined for the portion 620 and the false answer supervision result detected for the other portion 625 . For example, if false answer supervision is detected for the portion 620 and not for the other portion 625 , then the portion 620 is the false answer supervision portion 630 . As illustrated in FIG. 6 , the false answer supervision portion 630 may span more than one portion. The false answer supervision portion 630 may even span every portion of the route 600 , i.e., the entire route 600 may be the false answer supervision portion 630 .
  • a convenient embodiment directs the provider 605 to determine at the provider 605 , the indicator of false answer supervision for the portion 620 .
  • the embodiment directs the provider 605 to determine the indicator of false answer supervision as either: i) a function of a number of completed calls of short duration and a number of hangups or ii) a function of a distribution of differences between timestamps of alert signals and timestamps of connect signals used to complete calls.
  • the embodiment directs the provider using signals or messages.
  • Another embodiment directs the first downstream provider 610 to determine at the first downstream provider 610 , another indicator of false answer supervision in substantially the same manner as the provider 605 .
  • the embodiment detects the false answer supervision portion 630 based on: i) the indicator of false answer supervision for the portion 620 between the provider 605 and the first downstream provider 610 , and ii) the other indicator of false answer supervision for the other portion 625 that continues downstream from the first downstream provider 610 .
  • the false answer supervision portion 630 (i.e., the portion of the route 600 for which false answer supervision is detected) includes the provider 605 , the first downstream provider 610 , and the second downstream provider 615 .
  • the providers 605 , 610 , and 615 may each be contributing to the false answer supervision that is detected. False answer supervision, however, is not detected downstream of the second provider 615 . As such, at the very least, the second provider 615 is contributing false answer supervision.
  • the embodiment identifies the second provider 615 as the false answer supervision provider of the false answer supervision portion 630 .
  • the second downstream provider/false answer supervision provider 615 is a root cause or source of false answer supervision for the route 600 .
  • the embodiment removes the second downstream provider/false answer supervision provider 615 from the route 600 .
  • the embodiment repeats the foregoing (viz., i) determining an indicator of false answer supervision for a portion of a route, ii) detecting a false answer supervision portion based on the indicator and a result of detecting false answer supervision for another portion of the route, iii) identifying a false answer supervision provider for the false answer supervision portion, and iv) removing the false answer supervision provider) until false answer supervision is not detected.
  • the embodiment addresses the problem of multiple providers contributing to false answer supervision for a route.
  • false answer supervision can be due to configuration errors. Identifying the false answer supervision provider or root cause of false answer supervision, in a manner as described above, can be used to troubleshoot such errors.
  • detecting false answer supervision for the route is envisioned to be a “community” effort.
  • Each provider detects false answer supervision for a respective portion of the route provided, for example, using the process 300 of FIG. 3 . False answer supervision is detected based on the result of each provider detecting false answer supervision.
  • a provider detects false answer supervision for a portion between the provider and a downstream provider in the manner described above.
  • the downstream provider then tries to detect false answer supervision for portion between it and a provider downstream from it.
  • a provider e.g., the provider 605 of FIG. 6
  • a downstream provider e.g., the first downstream provider 610 of FIG. 6
  • a provider is not aware of a provider that is further downstream (e.g., the second downstream provider 615 of FIG. 6 ).
  • the foregoing continues in a recursive manner resulting in a “chain of false answer supervision.”
  • the chain ends when a provider does not detect false answer supervision.
  • the provider at the end of the false answer supervision chain is a root or source of false answer supervision and is removed. Because there may be more than one source of false answer supervision to be removed, detecting false answer supervision may be repeated, as described, until false answer supervision is not detected.
  • FIG. 7 is a block diagram of the internal structure of a computer 750 in which various embodiments of the present invention may be implemented.
  • the computer 750 contains system bus 769 , where a bus is a set of hardware lines used for data transfer among the components of a computer or processing system.
  • Bus 769 is essentially a shared conduit that connects different elements of a computer system (e.g., processor, disk storage, memory, input/output ports, network ports, etc.) that enables the transfer of information between the elements.
  • I/O device interface 782 Attached to system bus 769 is I/O device interface 782 for connecting various input and output devices (e.g., keyboard, mouse, displays, printers, speakers, etc.) to the computer 750 .
  • Network interface 786 allows the computer 750 to connect to various other devices attached to a network.
  • Memory 790 provides volatile storage for computer software instructions 792 (e.g., instructions for the process 300 of FIG. 3 for detecting false answer supervision) and data 794 used to implement an embodiment of the present invention.
  • Disk storage 795 provides non-volatile storage for computer software instructions 792 and data 794 used to implement an embodiment of the present invention.
  • Central processor unit 784 is also attached to system bus 769 and provides for the execution of computer instructions.
  • the processor routines 792 e.g., instructions for the process 300 of FIG. 3 for detecting false answer supervision
  • data 794 are a computer program product (generally referenced 792 ), including a computer readable medium (e.g., a removable storage medium such as one or more DVD-ROM's, CD-ROM's, diskettes, tapes, etc.) that provides at least a portion of the software instructions for the invention system.
  • Computer program product 792 can be installed by any suitable software installation procedure, as is well known in the art.
  • At least a portion of the software instructions may also be downloaded over a cable, communication and/or wireless connection.
  • the present invention may be implemented in a variety of computer architectures.
  • the computer of FIG. 7 is for purposes of illustration and not limitation of the present invention.
  • block, flow, and network diagrams may include more or fewer elements, be arranged differently, or be represented differently. It should be understood that implementation may dictate the block, flow, and network diagrams and the number of block, flow, and network diagrams illustrating the execution of embodiments of the invention.
  • elements of the block, flow, and network diagrams described above may be implemented in software, hardware, or firmware.
  • the elements of the block, flow, and network diagrams described above may be combined or divided in any manner in software, hardware, or firmware.
  • the software may be written in any language that can support the embodiments disclosed herein.
  • the software may be stored on any form of computer readable medium, such as random access memory (RAM), read only memory (ROM), compact disk read only memory (CD-ROM), and so forth.
  • RAM random access memory
  • ROM read only memory
  • CD-ROM compact disk read only memory
  • a general purpose or application specific processor loads and executes the software in a manner well understood in the art.

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Signal Processing (AREA)
  • Computer Networks & Wireless Communication (AREA)
  • Quality & Reliability (AREA)
  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Data Exchanges In Wide-Area Networks (AREA)
  • Telephonic Communication Services (AREA)
US12/538,384 2009-08-10 2009-08-10 Detecting false answer supervision Abandoned US20110033032A1 (en)

Priority Applications (4)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US12/538,384 US20110033032A1 (en) 2009-08-10 2009-08-10 Detecting false answer supervision
US13/389,585 US9203952B2 (en) 2009-08-10 2010-08-06 Detecting false answer supervision
PCT/US2010/044725 WO2011019610A1 (en) 2009-08-10 2010-08-06 Detecting false answer supervision
EP10762779.6A EP2465231B1 (de) 2009-08-10 2010-08-06 Überwachung der erkennung von falschen antworten

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US12/538,384 US20110033032A1 (en) 2009-08-10 2009-08-10 Detecting false answer supervision

Related Child Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US13/389,585 Continuation US9203952B2 (en) 2009-08-10 2010-08-06 Detecting false answer supervision

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
US20110033032A1 true US20110033032A1 (en) 2011-02-10

Family

ID=43055309

Family Applications (2)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US12/538,384 Abandoned US20110033032A1 (en) 2009-08-10 2009-08-10 Detecting false answer supervision
US13/389,585 Active 2030-04-02 US9203952B2 (en) 2009-08-10 2010-08-06 Detecting false answer supervision

Family Applications After (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US13/389,585 Active 2030-04-02 US9203952B2 (en) 2009-08-10 2010-08-06 Detecting false answer supervision

Country Status (3)

Country Link
US (2) US20110033032A1 (de)
EP (1) EP2465231B1 (de)
WO (1) WO2011019610A1 (de)

Cited By (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2017035643A1 (en) * 2015-09-01 2017-03-09 Investel Capital Corporation Call connection management system and method, and automated call billing management system and method associated therewith
US9736197B2 (en) 2009-05-20 2017-08-15 Peerless Networks, Inc. Call extender for inter-carrier network switch
EP3726825A1 (de) 2019-04-16 2020-10-21 Bics Sa/Nv System und verfahren zur betrugserkennung im internationalen telekommunikationsverkehr
US11956381B1 (en) * 2023-01-17 2024-04-09 Avoxi, Inc. Proactive telephone number monitoring based on answer seizure ratio

Families Citing this family (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US12095942B2 (en) 2020-09-03 2024-09-17 AB Handshake Corporation Method and apparatus for detecting SMS parameter manipulation
US10951775B1 (en) 2020-09-03 2021-03-16 AB Handshake Corporation Method and system for detection of call signal manipulation
US11297189B2 (en) * 2020-09-03 2022-04-05 AB Handshake Corporation Method and system for transmission of a session initiation protocol (SIP) identity header in an out-of-band verification network
US11343376B1 (en) 2021-04-30 2022-05-24 Verizon Patent And Licensing Inc. Computerized system and method for robocall steering

Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5878130A (en) * 1995-03-02 1999-03-02 Geotel Communications Corp Communications system and method for operating same
US20040023655A1 (en) * 2000-08-09 2004-02-05 Hoy Michael D Telecommunications systems
US20070008894A1 (en) * 2004-10-19 2007-01-11 Idt Corporation Telecommunications-based link monitoring system
US7257086B2 (en) * 2002-08-27 2007-08-14 Terabeam Corporation Method and system for effectuating network routing over primary and backup channels
US20080102851A1 (en) * 2006-10-27 2008-05-01 Arbinet-Thexchange, Inc. Dynamic routing

Family Cites Families (3)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5509055A (en) * 1993-06-30 1996-04-16 At&T Corp. Inbound telecommunications services resources management system
US6957255B1 (en) * 1999-06-28 2005-10-18 Amdocs (Israel) Ltd. Method and apparatus for session reconstruction and accounting involving VoIP calls
US8369503B2 (en) * 2009-07-16 2013-02-05 Chetan Dube False answer supervision management system

Patent Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5878130A (en) * 1995-03-02 1999-03-02 Geotel Communications Corp Communications system and method for operating same
US20040023655A1 (en) * 2000-08-09 2004-02-05 Hoy Michael D Telecommunications systems
US7257086B2 (en) * 2002-08-27 2007-08-14 Terabeam Corporation Method and system for effectuating network routing over primary and backup channels
US20070008894A1 (en) * 2004-10-19 2007-01-11 Idt Corporation Telecommunications-based link monitoring system
US20080102851A1 (en) * 2006-10-27 2008-05-01 Arbinet-Thexchange, Inc. Dynamic routing

Cited By (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US9736197B2 (en) 2009-05-20 2017-08-15 Peerless Networks, Inc. Call extender for inter-carrier network switch
WO2017035643A1 (en) * 2015-09-01 2017-03-09 Investel Capital Corporation Call connection management system and method, and automated call billing management system and method associated therewith
EP3726825A1 (de) 2019-04-16 2020-10-21 Bics Sa/Nv System und verfahren zur betrugserkennung im internationalen telekommunikationsverkehr
WO2020212275A1 (en) 2019-04-16 2020-10-22 Bics Sa/Nv System and method for detecting fraud in international telecommunication traffic
US11882236B2 (en) 2019-04-16 2024-01-23 Bics Sa/Nv System and method for detecting fraud in international telecommunication traffic
US11956381B1 (en) * 2023-01-17 2024-04-09 Avoxi, Inc. Proactive telephone number monitoring based on answer seizure ratio

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
US9203952B2 (en) 2015-12-01
EP2465231B1 (de) 2018-10-17
US20120140903A1 (en) 2012-06-07
WO2011019610A1 (en) 2011-02-17
EP2465231A1 (de) 2012-06-20

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US9203952B2 (en) Detecting false answer supervision
US7430286B2 (en) Method and system for generating a billing record
US5920613A (en) Method and system for generating a billing record
US6252951B1 (en) Method and system for generating a billing record
US8081578B2 (en) Methods, systems, and computer readable media for automatically categorizing voice over internet protocol (VoIP) subscriber devices in accordance with VoIP test and call quality data
WO2010005944A1 (en) Method and apparatus for determining whether a cellular phone chip is dormant
US7324634B2 (en) Telecommunications systems
JPH10224473A (ja) 大利用度ライン検出方法とその装置
US7773727B1 (en) Method for providing predictive maintenance relating to trunk operations in a VoIP network
US20050287954A1 (en) System and method for monitoring a communications network
US5528676A (en) Missed calls accounting and reporting system
CN110493810A (zh) 录音通知故障的检测方法、装置、设备和介质
US7505567B1 (en) Method for providing detection of fault location for defect calls in a VoIP network
US20060146992A1 (en) System and method for real time monitoring an interactive voice response system
US20060085538A1 (en) System and method for enhanced network monitoring
US20230344932A1 (en) Systems and methods for use in detecting anomalous call behavior
US8315365B2 (en) System and method for revenue unleaking
US6914967B1 (en) Method for measuring quality of service in a telecommunications network
US6366645B1 (en) System and method for providing service assurance for prepaid telecommunication services
KR100546013B1 (ko) 통화시간에 기초한 통화품질측정방법 및 그 시스템
US7369506B1 (en) Method and apparatus for enabling the detection of transparent defects
TW202324988A (zh) 專用交換機自動障礙偵測與通報之方法、系統及電腦可讀媒介
KR100534486B1 (ko) 이동통신 단말기의 고장유형 판단 방법
WO2017035643A1 (en) Call connection management system and method, and automated call billing management system and method associated therewith
EP1468415A2 (de) Verfahren zur steuerung einer sprachanwendung mittels einer webschnittstelle

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AS Assignment

Owner name: IBASIS, INC., MASSACHUSETTS

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:ZHANG, SHUPING;SINGH, MANPREET;SIGNING DATES FROM 20090812 TO 20090817;REEL/FRAME:023111/0298

STCB Information on status: application discontinuation

Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION