Caller Name Display: Telcos’ Body Urges TRAI for Optional Implementation

India defeat Wales

In a recent development, the Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) has put forth a compelling argument to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), asserting that the implementation of Calling Name Presentation (CNAP) should be left optional rather than enforced as a mandatory requirement. This plea from COAI, representing telecom giants such as Reliance Jio, Bharti Airtel, and Vodafone Idea, is grounded in concerns related to technology, privacy, and operational expenses.

COAI’s Standpoint: Making CNAP Optional

COAI has presented a robust case, advocating for the flexibility of telecom operators in deciding whether to implement CNAP or not. The association contends that obligating the implementation of CNAP could pose challenges on various fronts, and therefore, it should be a voluntary choice for telecom service providers.

Key Concerns Raised by COAI:

  1. Technical Challenges:
    • COAI highlights potential technical challenges that telecom operators might encounter during the implementation of CNAP.
    • The association emphasizes the need for a phased and well-structured approach to address any technical hurdles that may arise.
  2. Privacy Considerations:
    • Privacy emerges as a critical concern, with COAI underscoring the need for a balanced approach that safeguards the privacy of users.
    • The association advocates for an optional model, allowing telecom operators to align with privacy standards based on their operational and infrastructure capabilities.
  3. Cost-Related Issues:
    • COAI brings attention to the financial implications associated with the mandatory implementation of CNAP.
    • The association argues that making CNAP optional would provide telecom operators with the flexibility to manage costs effectively.

COAI’s Recommendations to TRAI:

In light of the concerns raised, COAI puts forward the following recommendations to TRAI:

  1. Voluntary Adoption:
    • COAI proposes that telecom operators should have the autonomy to decide whether or not to adopt CNAP.
  2. Phased Implementation:
    • To address technical challenges, COAI suggests a phased approach to the implementation of CNAP, allowing operators to navigate potential obstacles systematically.
  3. Privacy Safeguards:
    • COAI advocates for a framework that prioritizes user privacy, allowing telecom operators to align with established privacy standards.
  4. Flexible Cost Management:
    • Considering cost-related concerns, COAI recommends that the implementation of CNAP should be flexible, enabling operators to manage expenses efficiently.

Disclaimer: It’s important to note that Moneycontrol is affiliated with the Network18 group, and Network18 is under the control of Independent Media Trust, with Reliance Industries as the sole beneficiary.

In Conclusion: COAI’s appeal to TRAI underscores the significance of a balanced and flexible approach in the implementation of CNAP. The telecom industry awaits TRAI’s decision, which will play a pivotal role in shaping the landscape of caller name display practices among telecom operators in India. Stay tuned for further developments on this front.

Note: This blog is provided for informational purposes only and is not an official statement from COAI or TRAI.