this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2026
5 points (60.0% liked)
Technology
43468 readers
429 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A test number would suffice in some situations. When an incompetent VOIP provider takes an action to block calls “for security purposes”, they cannot legally block /all/ calls. 911 calls must be permitted. And 911 test calls would obviously require the same status. I do not trust their competency. But if their call blocking allows a 911 test number through, it proves that their blockade is not a simple crude block on /everything/.
A test number would not be the only solution. With some services you can set the CID to whatever you want. So in principle a CID of 555-1212 could have special meaning to 911 receiptionists. So a tester would set the CID info to that number before calling 911.
911 is not always instantly answered by humans. When answered by a machine, there could be a cancel code. E.g. dial “119” after connecting to cancel it.
Sure, if you need that extra level of certainty. In the typical cases that I mentioned (no GSM subscription), a test number would be sufficient. It would show that the dialed number reaches a switch that treats it.
Sounds like a bunch of good ideas. Have you considered proposing those to the people who can actually implement them?