Comparing to RCD

VVP (the protocol used by Open Verifiable Calling) is compatible with RCD. It was not created to replace or supplant RCD (Rich Call Data), but to provide broader and more durable evidence about caller and callee identity, authorization, and accountability. VVP can produce evidence that justifies an RCD-branded call passport, and can operate independently or alongside RCD-based solutions. It is designed to extend trust across jurisdictions and ecosystems where RCD is not yet deployed, and to add verifiability for non-brand-related questions such as the use of agents, call centers, or AI participants.

Both RCD and VVP can coexist in SIP signaling. A single call may include both an RCD PASSporT and a VVP PASSporT in the same SIP INVITE. (In fact, it may include a SHAKEN PASSporT as well. See Comparing to SHAKEN.) RCD focuses on consumer-facing display of brand within contexts where some other mechanism provides assurance of the caller's right to use the telephone number (e.g., SHAKEN). VVP provides foundational, cryptographically verifiable evidence that is standalone, and that can strengthen or justify RCD branding claims. A call may originate in a VVP-only environment and later traverse into an RCD/SHAKEN jurisdiction, with VVP data supplying the trust basis for an RCD passport. However, an RCD-only call cannot be upgraded to VVP downstream, because RCD’s evidence scope is narrower.

Aspect	RCD	VVP
Primary Purpose	Building on a CLID assurance mechanism like SHAKEN, enhance consumer recognition and trust by displaying verified brand and intent information (logo, name, call reason).	Provide independent, cryptographically verifiable evidence of identity, authority, and accountability for any caller or callee.
Underlying Technology	In-band SIP signaling when caller identy already has an "A" attestation in SHAKEN. (Technically, can be used without SHAKEN, but this enables some fraud scenarios.)	Uses STIR-compatible PASSporTs with evidence of many facts including identity and brand; no dependence on SHAKEN or additional brand vetting.
Scope of Evidence	Brand assets: name, logo, color scheme, and call intent.	Globally recognized identity of legal entity that's accountable for the call Ownership or license for that legal entity to use brand assets: name, logo, color scheme. Call intent Right of legal entity to use telephone number Relationship between legal entity and a BPO that proxies them Signing authority delegated from legal entity to their OSP Certifications, licenses, or accreditations of the caller Certifications or accreditations of each issuer of evidence, tracing back to global roots of trust like GLEIF or national regulatory authorities Involvement (or lack of involvement) of an AI agent in the communication Settlement details Identity, qualifications, and authorizations of the specific staff member making a call on behalf of the responsible organization Optionally, the same attributes about the callee (instead or in addition) Historical audit trail
Verification Direction	Caller → Callee (unidirectional)	Bidirectional (caller ↔ callee)
Timing	Evaluated in real time only.	Can be verified retroactively, preserving a permanent audit trail.
Governance and Jurisdiction	Depends on national STIR/SHAKEN governance; primarily domestic use.	Global; independent of jurisdiction; interoperable across industries.
Integration with SHAKEN	Requires “A attestation” under STIR/SHAKEN.	Can justify “A attestation” or generate RCD passports from its evidence.
Evidence Persistence	Short-lived; limited to the call moment.	Long-lived; dossiers and credentials are reusable and cacheable.
Centralization	Relies on national or carrier-based certificate authorities.	Decentralized; no registry or central CA required.
Use Cases	Brand recognition, marketing, and anti-spoofing for enterprises.	Broader assurance: cross-border compliance, AI involvement, regulated sectors, or identity interoperability with web/email/RCS.

In short, RCD focuses on improving call presentation and consumer confidence in specific telephony contexts where another mechanism like SHAKEN is also assumed to exist, while VVP generalizes verifiable identity and evidence to any communication or jurisdiction, making it the foundation upon which mechanisms like RCD can safely rest.