Consent must be tracked per consumer, not per list
The requirementstatement
Consent must be recorded against the individual consumer rather than at list level.
- Severityseverity
- HighHIGHRejected by at least one carrier or provider, and a common cause of failure at the rest.
- When it bitesphase
- Gates approvalapprovalGet this wrong and the brand or campaign is refused at registration.
- What is checkedobject
- campaign.message_flow
- Where it liveslayer
- OperationalOPERATIONAL
- How Ekas settles itdetectability
- AI · formAI_FORM
- A semantic question about what you wrote: whether a description matches a use case, whether a name looks like a filed entity. Judged by a model against written criteria.
- What the fix involvesfailureClass
- Fix the fieldRETRY_FIELD
- A better value in the form fixes it. Ekas can rewrite it and re-check.
- Who requires itauthorities
- CTIAFCCTCR
- When it appliesapplicabilityText
- Applies to every 10DLC registration.
Why this rule existsrationale
How to fix itremediation
Record consent per phone number with its own timestamp and source, never as a property of a list or segment.
A compliant exampleexample
Each number carries its own consent timestamp, medium and disclosure version.
Rules you will hit next
6 other rules read campaign.message_flow. Fixing one field to satisfy a single rule is how a resubmission trades one rejection for another, so read these before you change anything.
OPS-217 is one of 139 operational rules in the 915-rule 10DLC registry. Free to cite under CC BY 4.0.