- enum-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: U.S. Provider ENUM Trial Announced
by Niall O'Reilly 18 May '06

18 May '06

On 18 May 2006, at 18:39, Mulberry, Karen wrote: > I thought you might find the following US ENUM LLC Press Release > of interest for future ENUM discussions at RIPE. Thanks, Karen. Exciting news! I expect that people on the RIPE WG mailing list will find it more convenient to have a pointer to the announcement (if I'm not mistaken, this would be http://enumllc.com/ProviderTrial.htm) rather than a fancy mail with attachments. Whenever you have more news to share with us, please feel free to post directly to the list. Best regards, Niall O'Reilly Co-Chair, RIPE ENUM Working Group

1 0

ENUM provisioning platform for 0.4.e164.arpa top level domain
by Adrian Georgescu 15 May '06

15 May '06

ANISP, the Romanian Internet Service Provider Association http:// www.anisp.ro representing more than 40 service providers (http:// www.anisp.ro/?c=membri) will build a provisioning system for the ENUM tree 0.4.e164.arpa. The Romanian ENUM exchange will be hosted in two RoNIX locations (Romanian Network for Internet eXchange) and will be backed up by an infrastructure hosted within the European backbone. The 0.4.e164.arpa is under the authority of the Romanian regulatory body ANRC, which by end of this year planned to define the final procedures of delegation and administration of the public ENUM tree 0.4.e164.arpa. A press release is available at: http://www.sipcenter.com/sip.nsf/newsview? open&type=News&docid=WEBB6PNKZT Adrian Georgescu AG Projects

2 1

Delegation of 9.3.e164.arpa / ENUM DNS Quality
by Otmar Lendl 05 May '06

05 May '06

Folks, domain: 9.3.e164.arpa descr: Italy ENUM Mapping nserver: dns.istsupcti.it nserver: dns2.istsupcti.it remarks: Ministero delle Comunicazioni - http://www.comunicazioni.it remarks: Istituto Superiore delle Comunicazioni e delle tecnologie dell'Informazione remarks: http://www.iscom.gov.it but: ; <<>> DiG 9.2.4 <<>> 9.3.e164.arpa ns @dns.istsupcti.it ;; global options: printcmd ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached and ; <<>> DiG 9.2.4 <<>> 9.3.e164.arpa ns @dns2.istsupcti.it ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 4925 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;9.3.e164.arpa. IN NS ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: arpa. 3600 IN SOA ns1.istsupcti.it. administrator.istsupcti.it. 2006022816 900 600 86400 3600 -------------- Some people seem to view that as they only run a trial (if at all) on their ENUM country-code delegation, nameserver performance and reliability does not matter. This is wrong. ENUM is in production in other countries. A lot of SIP proxies query e164.arpa for all calls to E.164 numbers. That includes calls to countries where ENUM is not in production yet. Calls to Italy are thus running into a DNS timeout. This is not good. So please: Even if you are not in production with your country-code: PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT YOUR NAMESERVERS ANSWER. EVEN IF ALL THEY EVER SEND IS NXDOMAIN. Thank you. /ol -- < Otmar Lendl (lendl(a)nic.at) | nic.at Systems Engineer >

2 3

European ENUM in London
by me1-telecoms 05 May '06

05 May '06

FOR YOUR NEXT OPPORTUNITY TO CATCH UP WITH ENUM DEVELOPMENTS IN EUROPE AND TO LEARN AND SHARE WITH YOUR PEERS.........COME TO LONDON IN JUNE. You should join the Marcus Evans ENUM AND VOIP PEERING FORUM in London, UK. 19-21 June. This is an outstanding event regarding ENUM and related questions such as VoIP Peering and IP Interconnect. Many of the key European players in this arena will be present. The two days are really packed with information, so if you are really interested, read the Programme PDF attached and contact our Sales Hotline if you want to register. Sales Hotline: 0044 (0)207 647 2333 Contact Email: me1-telecoms(a)marcusevansuk.com Programme PDF <<ENUM ME LONDON 2006.pdf>>

2 1

European ENUM in London
by me1-telecoms 04 May '06

04 May '06

FOR YOUR NEXT OPPORTUNITY TO CATCH UP WITH ENUM DEVELOPMENTS IN EUROPE AND TO LEARN AND SHARE WITH YOUR PEERS.........COME TO LONDON IN JUNE. You should join the Marcus Evans ENUM AND VOIP PEERING FORUM in London, UK. 19-21 June. This is an outstanding event regarding ENUM and related questions such as VoIP Peering and IP Interconnect. Many of the key European players in this arena will be present. The two days are really packed with information, so if you are really interested, read the Programme PDF attached and contact our Sales Hotline if you want to register. Sales Hotline: 0044 (0)207 647 2333 Contact Email: me1-telecoms(a)marcusevansuk.com Programme PDF <<ENUM ME LONDON 2006.pdf>>

2 1

Re: [enum-wg] Follow up on Jim Reid's presentation - CRUE and relation to IETF work
by Jim Reid 01 May '06

01 May '06

On Apr 28, 2006, at 07:58, Michael Haberler wrote: > I'm a bit puzzled though about your slides where you mention > "CRUE" (Carrier Registration in User ENUM) and its potential > international interoperability aspects. > > currently the IETF work on Infrastructure ENUM is progressing > nicely - I expect the long-run solution to be a separate apex (like > ie164.arpa for instance) and http://www.enum.at/ietf/draft-haberler- > carrier-enum-02.html will be the backwards-compatible interim > solution until ITU and friends have their act together. Looks like > all this is done this year. This will provide a easy manageable > home for carrier-related information. Michael, CRUE has no bearing whatsoever on Infrastructure ENUM. This will be apparent when the CRUE document is published on the new UK ENUM web site. [I'll make an announcement about that when it goes on- line.] The object of CRUE is to get lots of meaningful data into the UK ENUM tree so that ENUM-aware applications can be encouraged because there's a better chance of getting a successful ENUM lookup. The scheme is simple. Communications Service Providers register a block of numbers. This gets verified against the regulator's public database of block allocations to CSPs. The registry enters 2 NAPTRs for these numbers: a tel: URI and a sip: URI. The only "control" the CSP has here is the name of the SIP server: ie how non-PSTN calls can be terminated on their network. Now there's a lot of detail about ported numbers, allocation to end users and so forth. But that still doesn't make CRUE a replacement for "Infrastructure ENUM" whatever that happens to mean today. BTW I don't share your optimism that standardisation of Carrier ENUM can be completed this year. But let's not jump down that rat-hole. > I'm a bit concernced about diverging developments - maybe you can > enlighten us where you're heading and how this will interoperate > with the rest of us. CRUE is not a "standard". Or a protocol. It's just a means to get lots of NAPTRs populating the 4.4.e164.arpa name space. So there are no interoperability issues.

2 4

RE: [enum-wg] Follow up on Karen Mulberry's presentation today
by Mulberry, Karen 01 May '06

01 May '06

Niall, The TPAC will send their reports to the CC1 ENUM LLC. It will be up to the LLC to make those reports public. I suspect that since the LLC has an obligation to send those reports to all the CC1 North American Numbering Plan countries that they will be made public and accessible to everyone who is interested in the US trial's progress. Karen Mulberry Neustar Inc. -----Original Message----- From: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Niall O'Reilly Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 3:35 AM To: Mulberry, Karen Cc: Niall O'Reilly; Carsten Schiefner; enum-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [enum-wg] Follow up on Karen Mulberry's presentation today On 30 Apr 2006, at 22:02, Mulberry, Karen wrote: > Also the TPAC will produce reports on its trial activities on a > monthly > basis for the CC1 ENUM LLC. Is it planned to publish these monthly as they are produced, or will they be kept internal to the CC1 ENUM LLC? /Niall

1 0

RE: [enum-wg] Follow up on Karen Mulberry's presentation today
by Mulberry, Karen 01 May '06

01 May '06

Carsten, My responses Q1: The number resources the FCC is meant to set aside for the ENUM trial - will they cover all US geographic area codes or is that somehow limited? If so, what will be the limits or restrictions? The US trial committee participants are identifying the geographic areas (NPAs) and the amount of numbers they require to conduct their ENUM test cases. Since the FCC has not responded to the wavier request with any restrictions or limits, there are none that I am aware of at this time. Trial participants do not expect to have limits placed on them beyond what the USG terms and conditions called for - that all numbers to be used in the US ENUM trial must be allocated under wavier by the FCC. Q2: In slide 5, 9 and 10 you mention the "Trial Participants Advisory Committee (TPAC)", what roles will be involved when in the trial and what documentation TPAC is meant to produce. I just wonder to what extent the users - aka. number holders, aka. ENUM domain name registrants - will be involved, as they seem to not be mentioned explicitly? The trial MOU calls for trial participants to identify what role or roles they intend to play in the US trial. The ones that I outlined in my presentation are the options that a trail participant can choose from. Such as number holders are identified as End Users and ENUM Domain Name Registrants once they have been authenticated and verified. There are several parties that have indicated that they intend to be End Users for the trial. Also the TPAC will produce reports on its trial activities on a monthly basis for the CC1 ENUM LLC. Initially these reports should contain the organizational plans (who is playing what role(s)) and test case development associated with the three phases of the trial. Once the trial starts, I expect that the monthly reports will contain the results of the tests that have been run during that month. Once the trial has ended, a final report that summarizes all activities and results will be complied for the LLC. Karen Mulberry Neustar Inc. -----Original Message----- From: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Carsten Schiefner Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 8:50 AM To: enum-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: [enum-wg] Follow up on Karen Mulberry's presentation today [Background: Karen Mulberry gave a presentation on "Country Code 1 and the US ENUM Trial" this afternoon during the ENUM WG session, currently available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-52/presentations/uploads/Thursday /mulberry-country_code_1_and_the_us_enum_trial.pps - the following questions relate to that presentation] Karen, I have two questions in relation to your presentation: Q1: The number resources the FCC is meant to set aside for the ENUM trial - will they cover all US geographic area codes or is that somehow limited? If so, what will be the limits or restrictions? Q2: In slide 5, 9 and 10 you mention the "Trial Participants Advisory Committee (TPAC)", what roles will be involved when in the trial and what documentation TPAC is meant to produce. I just wonder to what extent the users - aka. number holders, aka. ENUM domain name registrants - will be involved, as they seem to not be mentioned explicitly? Thanks, Carsten

2 1

Re: [enum-wg] Follow up on Jim Reid's presentation - CRUE and relation to IETF work
by Stastny Richard 30 Apr '06

30 Apr '06

Hi Jim, >BTW I don't share your optimism that standardisation of Carrier ENUM >can be completed this year. But let's not jump down that rat-hole. For terminolgy: Carrier ENUM needs not to be standardized, it is Infrastructure ENUM. I agree that the long-term soltution cannot be standardized this year, because the earliest (optimistic) possible date is January 2007 JWhat Michael wanted to say is that the temporary solution defined in the Dallas treaty can be nationally implemented soon (as you will see) and could be ready for publication request this fall, so it could be used also internationally in a standadized way. Another question for clarification about CRUE: You mention that for each number a tel and an sip URI is entered. this requires each operator to provide a ingress element to their network How can this be done? Richard ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von Jim Reid Gesendet: Fr 28.04.2006 10:26 An: Michael Haberler Cc: enum-wg(a)ripe.net Betreff: Re: [enum-wg] Follow up on Jim Reid's presentation - CRUE and relation to IETF work On Apr 28, 2006, at 07:58, Michael Haberler wrote: > I'm a bit puzzled though about your slides where you mention > "CRUE" (Carrier Registration in User ENUM) and its potential > international interoperability aspects. > > currently the IETF work on Infrastructure ENUM is progressing > nicely - I expect the long-run solution to be a separate apex (like > ie164.arpa for instance) and http://www.enum.at/ietf/draft-haberler- > carrier-enum-02.html will be the backwards-compatible interim > solution until ITU and friends have their act together. Looks like > all this is done this year. This will provide a easy manageable > home for carrier-related information. Michael, CRUE has no bearing whatsoever on Infrastructure ENUM. This will be apparent when the CRUE document is published on the new UK ENUM web site. [I'll make an announcement about that when it goes on- line.] The object of CRUE is to get lots of meaningful data into the UK ENUM tree so that ENUM-aware applications can be encouraged because there's a better chance of getting a successful ENUM lookup. The scheme is simple. Communications Service Providers register a block of numbers. This gets verified against the regulator's public database of block allocations to CSPs. The registry enters 2 NAPTRs for these numbers: a tel: URI and a sip: URI. The only "control" the CSP has here is the name of the SIP server: ie how non-PSTN calls can be terminated on their network. Now there's a lot of detail about ported numbers, allocation to end users and so forth. But that still doesn't make CRUE a replacement for "Infrastructure ENUM" whatever that happens to mean today. BTW I don't share your optimism that standardisation of Carrier ENUM can be completed this year. But let's not jump down that rat-hole. > I'm a bit concernced about diverging developments - maybe you can > enlighten us where you're heading and how this will interoperate > with the rest of us. CRUE is not a "standard". Or a protocol. It's just a means to get lots of NAPTRs populating the 4.4.e164.arpa name space. So there are no interoperability issues.

3 3

RE: [enum-wg] Follow up on Jim Reid's presentation - CRUE and relation to IETF work
by Stastny Richard 30 Apr '06

30 Apr '06

> But let's assume that happens - what is the semantics of such a SIP > URI for a) an end user and b) an operator - can I bounce a call to > sip:number@bt.com if I find <number> in 4.4.e164.arpa and it returns > such a registry-entered sip URI? Can I (do I need to?), as a > end-user, distinguish who entered which record? What if I have a IP > Interconnect agreement with BT / what if not? I would assume BT might > have an opinion here.. Tony? IMHO this could only work, especially in User ENUM, if this Sip?:number@bt.com;user=phone is used purely to indicate a Service Provider ID (SPID). The domain name given is not resolvable in the public DNS, only within the providers DNS (as proposed yesterday by GSMA with the Local Routing Tables (LRT). One way to clearly distinguish from routable SIP entries would be to use an new enumservice called e.g. SPID to indicate that the domain name has to be resolved by other means. In this case the users may simply ignore enumservice spid because they cannot use it. This enumservise may also be useful in Infrastructure ENUM to distinguish between ENUM entries routable on the public Internet and pure SPID entries (e.g. gsmaworld.com) Richard

2 1

Follow up on Jim Reid's presentation today
by Carsten Schiefner 30 Apr '06

30 Apr '06

[Background: Jim Reid gave a presentation on "UK ENUM News" this afternoon during the ENUM WG session, currently available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-52/presentations/uploads/Thursday/re… - the following question relates to that presentation] Jim, I have a question in relation to your presentation: on the second slide it reads "Tier-1 registry appointed around October" - so my understanding is that UKEC, UKEG's successor, will not have any operational business, but will act as the delegee for 4.4.e164.arpa and have operations outsourced. Is that correct? Best, -C.

3 3

+43 Infrastructure ENUM - contract concluded
by Carsten Schiefner 30 Apr '06

30 Apr '06

All, I am not entirely sure why Michael's mail did not yet show up here, but anyways: here is another attempt to spread the news. Best, Carsten -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Enum] +43 Infrastructure ENUM - contract concluded Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:37:48 +0200 From: Michael Haberler <mah(a)inode.at> To: enum-wg@ripe.net,enum@ietf.org,ga@centr.org enum.at GmbH, operator of the +43 User ENUM registry, and RTR GmbH, the Austrian regulator,have concluded and signed a contract extension to the +43 ENUM operating contract on April 20, 2006, enabling enum.at GmbH to provide Infrastructure ENUM as currently standardized in the IETF. Service is scheduled to start next month. press releases (in german - english to follow:) http://www.portel.de/news/view_redsys_artikel.asp?id=10293 RTR: Österreich baut weltweite Vorreiterrolle bei ENUM aus ... Portel.de - Germany Wien, 27.04.06-11:45 Mit der Vertragserweiterung, die ie enum.at GmbH und RTR-GmbH am 18. April 2006 unterzeichnet haben, ist... http://www.ots.at/presseaussendung.php?schluessel=OTS_20060427_OTS0163&ch=t… Österreich baut weltweite Vorreiterrolle bei ENUM aus APA OTS (Pressemitteilung) - Austria Wien (OTS) - "Mit der Vertragserweiterung, die enum.at GmbH und RTR-GmbH am 18. April 2006 unterzeichnet haben, ist es in Österreich ... the contract addendum (also german, english translation to follow as well:) http://www.rtr.at/web.nsf/deutsch/Telekommunikation_Nummerierung_ENUM/$file… Richard Stastny blog comment: http://voipandenum.blogspot.com/2006/04/infrastructure-enum-in-austria-on-i… Michael Haberler Internet Foundation Austria

1 0

Follow up on Karen Mulberry's presentation today
by Carsten Schiefner 27 Apr '06

27 Apr '06

[Background: Karen Mulberry gave a presentation on "Country Code 1 and the US ENUM Trial" this afternoon during the ENUM WG session, currently available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-52/presentations/uploads/Thursday/mu… - the following questions relate to that presentation] Karen, I have two questions in relation to your presentation: Q1: The number resources the FCC is meant to set aside for the ENUM trial - will they cover all US geographic area codes or is that somehow limited? If so, what will be the limits or restrictions? Q2: In slide 5, 9 and 10 you mention the "Trial Participants Advisory Committee (TPAC)", what roles will be involved when in the trial and what documentation TPAC is meant to produce. I just wonder to what extent the users - aka. number holders, aka. ENUM domain name registrants - will be involved, as they seem to not be mentioned explicitly? Thanks, Carsten

1 0

Issues with RFC 3761 so far
by Patrik Fältström 27 Apr '06

27 Apr '06

It was mentioned in the plenary this morning the ticket system I use for creation of RFC 3761bis. The issues are so far: [Please don't respond to this email, respond to the original email that describes the ticket that was sent to the ENUM wg in the IETF, or add issues to the ticket system directly...instructions I can send on request] What I have in the tracker are the following issues: #838 ORDER/PRIORITY locality ORDER and PRIORITY is significant only within the current domain. This is not clear in RFC 3761. #861 Fast lane for Enumservice IANA registration It is proposed to establish a fast lane for rIANA egistration of non- essential Enumservices using only expert review and not the full RFC cycle. #870 DDDS - RFC3404 reserves ALL flag characters RFC 3404 specifies that all flag characters are reserved "for future versions of this document". #873 Character Set, Case Sensitivity, and NAPTR fields Character Set, Case Sensitivity, and NAPTR fields. NOTE - This is really three inter-related topics. As they are so closely tied together I have requested a single ticket. #874 REGEXP 'i' flag considered harmful RFC 3402 specifies an 'i' flag that can be applied to the REGEXP field. This flag is intended to make AUS matching case insensitive. For ENUM, this is not appropriate, as the allowed characters within an AUS are all case insensitive. #875 Only one Enumservice per NAPTR the syntax for Enumservices given in RFC3761 allows for more then one Enumservice to be given, by addiing them with a '+' #878 experimental ENUM services - clash prevention ecause of the cumbersome process of ENUMservice registration, more and more experimental services are popping up. Contrary to it's intended purpose, more and more of those services are used "de facto" not only internally, but between different parties. This increases the risk of collisions between several different implementations of "experimental" ENUMservices, hence creating the need for preventing collisions between those services. Patrik

1 0

Revised draft agenda for ENUM WG at RIPE 52
by Niall O'Reilly 26 Apr '06

26 Apr '06

Dear ENUM-WG Colleagues, Please find below the revised draft agenda for the ENUM WG at RIPE 52. Tu 25 Apr 15:00 (Plenary): Gerhard Schroeder: Security issues in ENUM Th 27 Apr 14:00 (ENUM WG slot): Start Duration Led by Description 14:00 3' Chair A: Administrivia: Welcome, Scribe, Jabberwok 14:03 2' Chair B: Minutes ENUM-WG at RIPE 51 14:05 3' Chair C: Review Action List (see notes below) 14:08 2' Chair D: Short News (if any) 14:10 8' LV E: RIPE NCC ENUM Report 14:18 10' GS/Chair F: Follow-up on Plenary: ENUM and Security G: Presentations 14:28 20' KM G1: +1 Trial 14:48 4' JR G2: +44 Update 14:52 4' JR G3: Testbed numbers 14:56 10' AB G4: +49 Commercial Operations 15:06 5' [TBA] G5: +353 Commercial Operations X: Interaction with other RIPE WGs 15:11 10' PK X1: Walking E164.ARPA 15:21 4' CS X2: DNS-WG-AP-51.5 15:25 3' Chair Y: AOB 15:28 2' Chair Z: Close: summarize actions, thanks 90' Your co-chairs are striving to minimize the proportion of the meeting given over to administrative items. Please help by sending corrections to the RIPE 51 ENUM WG minutes by e-mail to <enum-wg(a)ripe.net> to arrive no later than 12:00 UTC on Wednesday, 26 April. Notes for item C: Review action list 51.1 (RIPE NCC): Statistics from all e164.arpa servers. Report from NCC (Leo Vegoda?) at agenda item E 51.2 (Carsten Schiefner): Let NCC know details of missing links. Done? Carsten, please confirm to list in advance of meeting 51.3 (RIPE NCC): To check whether quarterly ENUM reports to IAB would still be necessary and asked for. Done. Changes are publicised on the enum-announce list. Report duplicates these. 51.4 (Peter Koch): Continue walking e164.arpa and report at RIPE 52. Report/presentation from PK at agenda item X 51.5 (Jim Reid): Stimulate discussion on testbed numbers/ranges. Presentation from JR at agenda item G3 51.6 (Carsten Schiefner): Cross-check on DNS-WG-AP-51.5. Mention at agenda item X 51.7 (All): Test reachability of non-geo +43 780 numbers. Done? Many people responded. Do the +43 ppl need anything more? Please will someone from +43 confirm in advance of the meeting. On Carsten's behalf as well as for myself, I hope to see all of you in Istanbul! Best regards, Niall O'Reilly Co-Chair, RIPE ENUM Working Group

2 3

Delegation of +359/9.5.3.e164.arpa completed
by Carsten Schiefner 20 Apr '06

20 Apr '06

Dear colleagues, the ENUM delegation request for 9.5.3.e164.arpa - +359 is Bulgaria's E.164 CC - was confirmed by ITU-T TSB on 12 Apr 2006. As per yesterday, 9.5.3.e164.arpa is delegated to ns.bol.bg. [193.200.15.129] ns.bolbg.com. [193.200.15.133] Welcome, Bulgaria! :-) Best, Carsten Schiefner

2 2

ENUM-capable email client?
by Carsten Schiefner 16 Apr '06

16 Apr '06

All, there is a Firefox ENUM plug-in (currently for Win only) available at: http://www.falb.at/ that resolves enum:[E.164 number] to an URL in case such web service is specified in the respective ENUM zone to that very E.164 number. E.g., with this plug-in, a click on enum:+43780325228 would get you to Juergen Falb's homepage, too. My question is: is anyone aware of a similar extension or even built-in function of a mail client, so that an E.164 number would be resolved to an email address? Best regards, Carsten Schiefner

7 14

e164.arpa delegations with actual zone contents
by Florian Weimer 16 Apr '06

16 Apr '06

Maybe this is slightly off-topic, but which of the existing e164.arpa delegations have actual subdelegations (or in-zone NAPTR entries)? I know that +43 and +49 have already got a few delegations, and +353 has some entries as well, but what about the others? The status page at <http://enumdata.org/> is unfortunately out of date (or reflects a very strange definition of "trial").

1 0

Re: Revised draft agenda for ENUM WG at RIPE 52
by Alexander Mayrhofer 11 Apr '06

11 Apr '06

> 51.7 (All): Test reachability of non-geo +43 780 numbers. > Done? > Many people responded. Do the +43 ppl need anything more? > Please will someone from +43 confirm in advance of the meeting. Hi, we have a lot of data points already collected, and more and more of them are positive - so there's no urgent need for more testing. However, if anybody happens to be in an area which is still not covered, performing the test is still appreciated. The current test results are available at: http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/43780 Many thanks to all who participated - those tests really helped us a lot, including debugging/proofing a routing bug at a local important telco. cheers Alex

1 0

+353 ENUM bid
by Michael Haberler 22 Mar '06

22 Mar '06

http://www.comreg.ie/publications/default.asp?ctype=5&nid=102304 -Michael

1 0

RIPE 51 draft minutes, RIPE 52 draft agenda
by Carsten Schiefner 16 Mar '06

16 Mar '06

Dear colleagues - First of all, a warm "Thank you!" to Pierre Baume of the RIPE NCC for taking the minutes. The first draft is available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/enum/minutes/r51-minutes.html Please send in any comments and/or corrections you may have, to this list directly and/or to <enum-wg-chair(a)ripe.net>. There will be a last call on Friday 14 April 2006, objections will be accepted by e-mail until 12:00 UTC Wednesday 26 April 2006. Further objections acceped in person at WG session, with immediate decision on dealing with them at the meeting (could need more time on list). In the absence of any objections, the minutes will be declared "final" Monday 01 May 2006. Secondly, I'd like to provide you with a first draft of the agenda for the upcoming meeting. Also in this case, Niall and I will be happily taking your comments, suggestions etc. on the list directly and/or via <enum-wg-chair(a)ripe.net>. Best, Carsten === Draft agenda for the ENUM WG session at RIPE 52 A. Administrivia Welcome Scribe Jabberwok B. Minutes ENUM WG at RIPE 51 Last call as Friday 14 April Objections accepted by e-mail until 12:00 UTC Wednesday 26 April Further objections acceped in person at WG session Decision on dealing with objections at meeting (could need more time on list) Absent objections, declare "final" Monday 01 May C. Review open actions 51.1 (RIPE NCC): Statistics from all e164.arpa servers. 51.2 (Carsten Schiefner): Let NCC know details of missing links. 51.3 (RIPE NCC): To check whether quarterly ENUM reports to IAB would still be necessary and asked for. 51.4 (Peter Koch): Continue walking e164.arpa and report at RIPE 52. 51.5 (Jim Reid): Stimulate discussion on testbed numbers/ranges. 51.6 (Carsten Schiefner): Cross-check on DNS-WG-AP-51.5. 51.7 (All): Test reachability of non-geo +43 780 numbers. D. News IETF-watch I-D/RFC alert ENUM status update E. RIPE-NCC ENUM Report Delegations Query rates ... F. Presentations (unless covered by brief announcements at item D) +1 Trial (requested) +30 Trial (requested) +49 Commercial Operations (Andreas Baess) +353 Commercial Operations (tba.) +43 Experience, the Registry Days held earlier in April (tba.) G. Follow-up on EOF presentations (if any) ENUM security aspects ... Y. Mutual issues with other WGs DNS-WG ... Z. Close Summarize open actions Thanks to attendance, participants, and helpers

1 0

ENUM-Registry info days in Austria
by Alexander Mayrhofer 09 Mar '06

09 Mar '06

[on behalf of robert] Dear ENUM-WG-Members, I like to inform you that ENUM.AT will hold a 2-days event about its ENUM-operations in Austria. This event will focus on registry topics and there will be room to discuss operational experience and lessons learned as well - please find details in the draft agenda below. The meeting will be open to all interested RIPE members however for planning purpose registration before March 27th is appreciated. When: April 3-4, 2006 Where: University of Vienna, Computing Center Universitaetsstrasse 7 A-1010 Vienna Austria Registration: office(a)enum.at Draft Agenda: Legal Framework - Regulator´s Role - enum.at Contract with Regulator - Validation Requirements - Number Ranges Role Modell and Data Flow - Registry - Registrar - Validation Entity - Communication Service Provider Registry Interface - EPP - Validation Token - Finger -> Dispute Resolution Overview Software Architecture Commercial Terms & Conditions Lessons Learned - Problems with special number ranges - moving from trial to production - availability of products Things to watch for - local environment conditions: - open vs closed number plan - number allocation practices - positioning: ENUM and number portability - local conditions & strategy For any questions please don´t hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Robert Schischka ------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Schischka enum.at GmbH Karlsplatz 1/2/9 A-1010 Vienna Austria Email: Robert.Schischka(a)enum.at Telefon +43 (1) 505 64 16 - 15 Fax +43 (1) 505 64 16 - 19 Mobile: +43 664 913 47 78 ------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Schischka nic.at Internet Verwaltungs- und Betriebsgesellschaft m. b. H. Jakob-Haringer-Straße 8 A-5020 Salzburg Austria Email: Robert.Schischka(a)nic.at Telefon +43 (662) 4669-0 Fax +43 (662) 4669-19 Mobile: +43 664 913 47 78

1 0

Delegation of +30/0.3.e164.arpa completed
by Schiefner, Carsten 02 Mar '06

02 Mar '06

Dear colleagues, the ENUM delegation request for 0.3.e164.arpa - +30 is Greece's E.164 CC - was confirmed by ITU-T TSB on 6 Feb 2006. As per yesterday, 0.3.e164.arpa is delegated to grdns.ics.forth.gr [139.91.1.1] estia.ics.forth.gr [139.91.191.3] grdns-aix.ics.forth.gr [195.130.89.230] Welcome, Greece! :-) Best, Carsten Schiefner

1 0

Delegation of +1/1.e164.arpa (almost) completed
by Carsten Schiefner 21 Feb '06

21 Feb '06

Dear colleagues, the ENUM delegation request for 1.e164.arpa - +1 is the E.164 CC for the North American Numbering Plan (NANP) - has just been confirmed by ITU-T TSB. I expect the technical delegation to be just a matter of time then. Furthermore, given the size of possible delegations under 1.e164.arpa, I consider this a major step forward for Public User ENUM. Congratulations to all who worked on the ENUM LLC and on the project in general over the last couple of years. Best, Carsten Schiefner -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [enum-announce] Fw: NCC#2006021663 [RE: [Country Code 1 ENUM delegation request]] Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:39:34 +0100 From: RIPE NCC Staff <enum-request(a)ripe.net> Reply-To: RIPE NCC Staff <enum-request(a)ripe.net> To: enum-announce(a)ripe.net ----- Begin forwarded message ----- Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:19:13 +0100 From: <richard.hill(a)itu.int> To: <enum-request(a)ripe.net> Subject: RE: NCC#2006021663 [Country Code 1 ENUM delegation request] Message-Id: <334A4109C6BEA14ABB48EBCF274A6C8A0187C7E1(a)MAILBOX1.blue.itu.ch> The TSB confirms that the attached request for ENUM delegation of code 1 has been authorized by the concerned national Administrations for the purposes of technical trials for a period ending no later than one year after the confirmation of the delegation by RIPE NCC. The delegation may proceed when RIPE NCC receives formal confirmation from the Director of TSB. Richard Hill ----------------------------------------- Richard Hill Counsellor, ITU-T SG2 International Telecommunication Union Place des Nations CH-1211 Geneva 20 Switzerland tel: +41 22 730 5887 FAX: +41 22 730 5853 Email: richard.hill(a)itu.int Study Group 2 email: tsbsg2(a)itu.int > -----Original Message----- > From: RIPE NCC Staff [mailto:enum-request@ripe.net] > Sent: Wednesday, 15 February, 2006 10:36 > To: enum-announce(a)ripe.net; Hill, Richard > Subject: Fw: NCC#2006021663 [Country Code 1 ENUM delegation request] > > > ----- Begin forwarded message ----- > > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 15:17:05 -0500 > From: Matt Pounsett <matt.pounsett(a)cira.ca> > To: enum-request(a)ripe.net > Subject: NCC#2006021663 Country Code 1 ENUM delegation request > Message-Id: <BD21D30B-336C-42EE-88FA-4A942F1FCB9D(a)cira.ca> > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Domain Object > > domain: 1.e164.arpa. > descr: North American ENUM Mapping > admin-c: JB001-RIPE > tech-c: CIRA01-RIPE > zone-c: CIRA01-RIPE > nserver: ns01.enum-1a.ca > nserver: ns02.enum-1a.ca > mnt-by: MNT01-RIPE > mnt-lower: MNT01-RIPE > changed: matt.pounsett(a)cira.ca 20051101 > source: RIPE > > Admin Contact > > person: James Baskin > address: CC1 ENUM LLC > address: c/o McKenna Long and Aldridge LLP > address: 1875 Lawrence St, Suite 200 > address: Denver, CO 80202 > fax-no: +1 425 963 5445 > e-mail: baskin(a)enumllc.com > nic-hdl: JB01-RIPE > changed: matt.pounsett(a)cira.ca 20051101 > source: RIPE > > Zone/Tech Contact > > role: CIRA ENUM Registry > address: CIRA ENUM Registry > address: 350 Sparks Street, Suite 1110 > address: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada > address: K1R 7S8 > phone: +1 613 237 5335 > fax-no: +1 613 237 0534 > e-mail: admin-enum(a)cira.ca > nic-hdl: CIRA01-RIPE > admin-c: JP01-RIPE > tech-c: CIRA01-RIPE > mnt-by: MNT01-RIPE > changed: matt.pounsett(a)cira.ca 20051101 > source: RIPE > > Maintainer Object > > mntner: MNT01-RIPE > descr: CIRA ENUM Registry Operations > admin-c: JP01-RIPE > tech-c: CIRA01-RIPE > upd-to: admin-enum(a)cira.ca > mnt-nfy: admin-enum(a)cira.ca > auth: PGPKEY-F8DB0BCB > notify: admin-enum(a)cira.ca > mnt-by: MNT01-RIPE > changed: matt.pounsett(a)cira.ca 20051101 > source: RIPE > > Key-Cert Object > > key-cert: PGPKEY-F8DB0BCB > certif:-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- > certif:Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) > certif: > certif:mQGiBD8lZWMRBADUV5YbtxUlWGJwvwF3fK7PjmcmylncnhV81g+QdqU > HQ5IczWW9 > certif:3bEQVdag2sIiVfWA9ouSFd16R/7PUsV9k/xloqEYQfKQd1FfNrkUL5D > FdM/9QFQ1 > certif:c09/BLL0utUwGLgPfyB7CNgDAFmiBrmAh73jlQQ4zDoCr1ZYv9w+eUt > YnwCg+vM2 > certif:tREDAs1fCPstGqxNeS754ZUEAIWLdiwLyN2PYazFsUKBb+x4p9RqgiS > Gja8ZED4u > certif:q9j/Ve3x1ZKdNWcOkhF4/hkSHjB9iA4pgq1YCH12B0BtZT3+hBgF2wt > qMsxHpJ+P > certif:58rYFqdmu6bbD//LAcdJ7555xxYcuaSRPetpcb2cGsdZjJ7VmOqpPF6 > 3tdPLTew8 > certif:/sriA/43UdHFzfXB4LzS+IisLqZLuXRXSydjkSBac8jTE8BAxXlgaNN > gZWT45cCF > certif:i6/wDdhD7l8S2RJB4xvdV3llTU5OpMeluhJRmFHJdAoCBCFipI5sveB > Tj9MgHOjv > certif:hqF7Z4zayPB/HP0LarW4UeB99xFIOAPV/sWZ9FBj5VNi1PrzdrQzTWF > 0dCBQb3Vu > certif:c2V0dCAoUGVyc29uYWwgRW1haWwpIDxtYXR0QGNvbnVuZHJ1bS5jb20 > +iF4EExEC > certif:AB4CGwMGCwkIBwMCAxUCAwMWAgECHgECF4AFAkIzpBkACgkQae4z2vj > bC8sj8ACe > certif:Jsvj5N3YJobxQmuq847q67I9nmEAoLfj2ZBbwdMgKMLI7toegl6YHdQ > atCVNYXR0 > certif:IFBvdW5zZXR0IDxtYXR0LnBvdW5zZXR0QGNpcmEuY2E+iF8EExECAB8 > CGwMECwcD > certif:AgMVAgMDFgIBAh4BAheAAhkBBQJAsQlAAAoJEGnuM9r42wvL1zkAn0Z > aKEOj9Y6n > certif:4R1MY5cSKXDNkDViAKCEVrHAXY0Z5lu7zpDpeJeuLc/hvIhGBBARAgA > GBQI/JWq0 > certif:AAoJEASBw5fnLV8w9F0An2gkid4k6BYhkqwF394WG/59GXKAAJ9NW62 > E8N1SX+BF > certif:YkHc36JiGhPFc4hGBBMRAgAGBQJAs43xAAoJEMOLmjAkEC21INEAmQF > urhg1Sl2S > certif:wX/ihD21rHGuFy4wAJ95zqH7TbeyBI5XxEHJrXofzsUwjohGBBIRAgA > GBQJAsRVU > certif:AAoJENIP1AXK1QnGT+4An26Ws1nDuvnb+HEx9TRA7m5OmB5xAJ9lRtj > mxkbJZ4Sm > certif:RbOOrU9QoFQhGYhGBBIRAgAGBQJAsRV7AAoJEP3/j1jk20TytpgAoLq > Z8G70ic4o > certif:bNNrVXuYKN4MTXQCAJ9xcNaj7ozcPDlpLlknA25R4aTU+4hGBBMRAgA > GBQJAs3aZ > certif:AAoJEHLrsbD/Cs/x8DcAnR5AWACCqbE1FAVwJiVUtVQB07B6AJ9cpaX > tgkZOG3EQ > certif:Ez8hvBnS6afmpIkAlQMFEECzyyMHTRtfOVdXPQEBsVED/3rcjWhBBPY > bprcMPEJP > certif:UGr4t06Mos+Mx2pTUrgptS7+mh5OlsZX96P4HXpNvFUoUTC7gq/wIs0 > MJ+R72oaJ > certif:1t9z1iV9kh6mBs8LOveICdn72ScU0GlS6pfJx+OCr+3HQdA/j0ZdJn4 > LsijE2zOe > certif:mklKjQ1+Xl0j5o6Ajq7ppW8GiEYEExECAAYFAkCy+FEACgkQROB/wlN > WTDZ3/wCg > certif:vTAaMihTvFCQgGHoaDzFjpSsesMAn1PryPCY9lWFlOsRieFUji63SFh > yiEYEExEC > certif:AAYFAkC03rMACgkQ2ZjBE2zZsp9l6gCffa4GoDOBhKLZiQB01aF8Kb/ > TUQ4An222 > certif:udONtJFQTz472oT29OPta57LiEYEExECAAYFAkC07ZcACgkQNh6mMG5 > yMTbCFgCf > certif:SkKdlQ6MqvuHoi46/ng5UkpACCQAn3OUZhP3oSrwWcSRE+FYH8GJnMv > 0iEYEEBEC > certif:AAYFAkCy5fsACgkQnFcIO/K8+cHdqACdF9jfFA8rYbeMT1IrsNI/Aoo > jc/AAoLVu > certif:J6rYAUgJymLmos+lUSa0d7m0iEYEEBECAAYFAkCzdswACgkQqFN4NA7 > /LWhNFQCb > certif:BA/486okoS2QOhy2o8SH45S5f7YAnAi4jE3K8I9dALBwkpn7M8VxqSh > WiEYEEhEC > certif:AAYFAkC48ugACgkQNnstYOXbLtrHpACfb0wHv2Rrjb2PXyfsBmgmddV > K9jQAn36N > certif:UunxQ9m1ybdOOhCeCNSyn/2QiEYEEBECAAYFAkCy2JIACgkQpqs0pdM > 8UJWRZgCf > certif:d72WXPmu1jGMBWFx9T5tdWfb08UAnRD4HV8ENY285jzhUBqG8Qrqcbc > diQEmBBAB > certif:AQAQBQJA8rqCCQZuYW5vZzMxAAAKCRDlsSGMn56vyxjbCACZ3XuEdU0 > UlZPnouIf > certif:3P8gPLfiEl+i3a1+cux9xAL8bsjfGX1Vy+hn33saCeuGZohMUv4RTbW > q5NaDGrth > certif:+IWiqZgWbsrAGDVlEXIGYItYV6Ug8+d1ORA1A8n6sZ5iDwVfSFfenPU > ktX/Nfdpe > certif:HSHaM//IPiAQPfz7QXr+JC1X7Gs0gGVNqWenePqyxxJA5KguoB+Ae/O > E1bjGvzxc > certif:gRF3OS6rHbCXGLtOyOgq9A7Xm1Ozvr1qwsRdXvdSAZlqgVqFaKOxsxr > TQtewvdzk > certif:28gRvQGdjsgHGviEaQAF30nsK4MFitIvKnaZbOgO5EETEppd7APhms1 > YOh7B5po6 > certif:gTSpiEYEEhECAAYFAkF1lVgACgkQXArMTfW646Na6ACgmhEEIjnjqhq > rE9kFanKR > certif:GVYVH9YAn2BeYF3wvrJKaIpmWD0sBfRP6zLGtCNNYXR0IFBvdW5zZXR > 0IDxtYXR0 > certif:cEBjb251bmRydW0uY29tPohcBBMRAgAcBQJAsQrQAhsDBAsHAwIDFQI > DAxYCAQIe > certif:AQIXgAAKCRBp7jPa+NsLy926AJ49LVfwVMJl1QaUKmkx31BY7B+yXQC > dECRbjUhC > certif:/yfkdU/vrUFdVzYroq2IRgQTEQIABgUCQLON8QAKCRDDi5owJBAttWu > UAJ9hpr+0 > certif:WQzC3TeQp/VaORSodKlmugCfdT0EfVw8KaDwKsjWcEXgVnmIKTOIRgQ > SEQIABgUC > certif:QLEVUAAKCRDSD9QFytUJxiHsAJ9GkrBkUgXmd7c5W5A9jsnHEUMRtwC > aApkOihPH > certif:txfTHI/wMMSXMiYvKV+IRgQSEQIABgUCQLEVeAAKCRD9/49Y5NtE8nv > uAKCAsDMz > certif:rfPtYi7d5VVBmL+7g9psSACfbtupqhrf0Ct1t5RodFcPn+HECvWIRgQ > TEQIABgUC > certif:QLN2lQAKCRBy67Gw/wrP8Z+EAJ9VU6Sb0DOZILlS1G3Bb9Klibwm7wC > fZhL0YxSx > certif:CJNzCW+4GetIsc2C36mJAJUDBRBAs8tCB00bXzlXVz0BAcgxBACNqzx > lv+8Smqcj > certif:Rssja0KfOA66GfxeeosBzy1Up+T0q3IZd6QGmS9NEZyb+q7vgPjMJp2 > 25b1uWLlC > certif:IV2naSAWwur2NPIJchRcEomla3YPsUUUiojO4LdKLw8g5KhYc94W3hc > I19A3t0Zy > certif:9vjV+a4QWIP3xWog2YZEnO8KtOI+YYhGBBMRAgAGBQJAsvhOAAoJEET > gf8JTVkw2 > certif:bJEAnAvFkvUYeEzL34tCWlsv8oxLLLtYAJ4xU2FKhakkTNEg+5VN0fg > YQhn8lYhG > certif:BBMRAgAGBQJAtN6tAAoJENmYwRNs2bKfy+sAn2nAz/v4zLRUQ+dJQAA > OEsvUTSuZ > certif:AJwP54ShjZfcRcRgHlG+PaOQB1Z7MohGBBMRAgAGBQJAtO2YAAoJEDY > epjBucjE2 > certif:AtAAn2gV5jLwQzGnrke+lwSKuA7V90RBAKCIVVtbuuhFyqSClJ+M9fT > 20S9874hG > certif:BBIRAgAGBQJAuPLoAAoJEDZ7LWDl2y7aB+QAn2cN//y6S0iGBefjF8s > ElVs3fqQi > certif:AJ9o5zhj6PrMa6zbcOYVBzewQFGbx4hGBBIRAgAGBQJBdZVZAAoJEFw > KzE31uuOj > certif:clYAn3PTpjpquP0QtIr7KgkHR4DGk3QiAKDHMSTfwAxoUIB2jjUTRHW > ubdQXbYhG > certif:BBMRAgAGBQJBdBitAAoJEJVSPpf2Z1A7aKMAoOiWKC5fdFM2a+IEs5u > rRQvn2ijp > certif:AKCY8QluTS90gQ+bDqTJ/UPfER6/5ohhBDARAgAhBQJCM6RXGh0gZGV > wcmVjYXRl > certif:ZCBlbWFpbCBhZGRyZXNzAAoJEGnuM9r42wvL/mIAoPNMNRFEAXbBAaG > Boz8ogLHo > certif:ofBEAKCFK5bY7A/2qNgLt/40IFKju4AHQYhcBBMRAgAcAhsDBAsHAwI > DFQIDAxYC > certif:AQIeAQIXgAUCQjOkGQAKCRBp7jPa+NsLy5CjAJ9jZipSfZwbrK2LR5j > BAAfbxIk2 > certif:iACgn6DhVh7AM1cui8FNRtz0VcHkE1m5AQ0EPyVlZBAEALcTRnYLNv7 > TZsG18uwv > certif:XHGC9zEiMJURYBiZnH/WdpcttSheQ7GcQ7l5jWlbcsjuzopxVIf3KEK > rXH+xarIP > certif:doNkXvopRNrEEtzjdJoKVhqQ33irOLPxGjKchZOYCsCbm57zY8hTVn6 > NZNuHgNeE > certif:iTo9j9q02c+Eze3kddRf1wU/AAQNA/wIRADHs8plJ7sQnvDlFJjL5oi > k1n5Ec6Dz > certif:LM2NWpthV3nBsSt63/VAabpRgj/xfdWBdtSsmVJu6M/gDbH+35QXhFW > pOi4E3Yw5 > certif:a68BL6KFkhIkxApJG0suOboXu8kTTE/Ml7aj47UuCf0DhJSEAiylZuL > psj23Okd1 > certif:mU1G72p/nYhGBBgRAgAGBQJAsQlSAAoJEGnuM9r42wvL0VoAnRMZRM2 > 6+w+/Xwhx > certif:9GwHVj9gJKA8AJ98fejPyQ82Hx7qqWJs/CskXFuNZg== > certif:=iCIJ > certif:-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- > mnt-by: MNT01-RIPE > changed: matt.pounsett(a)cira.ca 20051101 > source: RIPE > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) > > iD8DBQFD8jrCae4z2vjbC8sRAoXJAJ9gp18VPBpi+AinH++qBpclCkngMQCgq/Z3 > nCAZ4zce5HLeqkf+3xPw/Pk= > =y/o0 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > ------ End forwarded message ------ > > ------ End forwarded message ------

1 2

ENUM motivation
by Joao Pereira 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

Hello We are beginning the request phase to the 1.5.3.e164.arpa in Portugal and we still have some doubts about the main motivation towards this technology, that would be from: - Traditional Telcos ? No, they want to bill all calls.... - New Telcos ? No, they want to keep their VoIP networks closed... - IP Telephony integrators (Alcatel, Cisco, Siemens,...)? Maybe... but they usually work together with the Telcos - the end users ? Yes :) Is this user interest going to be enough? And are they willing to pay for this registration? They can use free ENUM trees.... How can we push for more ENUM registrations in the e164.arpa tree? Thanks Joao Pereira FCCN

2 1

RE: [enum-wg] ENUM motivation
by Lupton, Ronan 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

Joao, There was a conference in Lisbon in November last discussing the various aspects of the ENUM play/s motivation etc. A number of people were in attendance from Telecom Portugal, I would be happy to discuss these contact with you bilaterally. Perhaps the forum is not the best place to ask these questions, but there are certainly folks who have interesting views. My own view is that this standard radically simplifies some of the more complex PSTN addressing problems and multiplicity of addressing issues consumers face. The markets are going to have to decide to a large extent how this standard develops. You may have noticed that the NANP, country code 1 (USA) delegation was approved yesterday. That might bring even more momentum to adoption of the standard. Regards, Ronan Ronan Lupton Senior Regulatory Manager & EMEA Interconnect Policy International Affairs Verizon Business Lower Erne St. Dublin 2. Ireland Tel: +353-1-2474525 Fax: +353-1-2474545 ENUM: +35315069888 mailto:ronan.lupton@ie.verizonbusiness.com Verizon and MCI are now operating as Verizon Business -----Original Message----- From: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Joao Pereira Sent: 16 February 2006 17:18 To: enum-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: [enum-wg] ENUM motivation Hello We are beginning the request phase to the 1.5.3.e164.arpa in Portugal and we still have some doubts about the main motivation towards this technology, that would be from: - Traditional Telcos ? No, they want to bill all calls.... - New Telcos ? No, they want to keep their VoIP networks closed... - IP Telephony integrators (Alcatel, Cisco, Siemens,...)? Maybe... but they usually work together with the Telcos - the end users ? Yes :) Is this user interest going to be enough? And are they willing to pay for this registration? They can use free ENUM trees.... How can we push for more ENUM registrations in the e164.arpa tree? Thanks Joao Pereira FCCN

1 0

RE: [enum-wg] Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial
by Lupton, Ronan 05 Feb '06

05 Feb '06

Admittedly then it may be very difficult to undertake a complete and transparent trial (Including all call case scenarios, money swaps, PSTN to XoIP) I spoke at a conference in Lisbon last week and was asked why the expression 'virtual number' was not included in the syntax of my presentation. My answer was very simple. The numbers can be virtual under prerogative for a period of time but would ultimately be useless. It has to be the real deal of won't attract consumers. Those folks that drive demand. Granted that the ENUM service might need to be wrapped-up into some type of simple client. I am also increasingly astounded by the fact that the Tier 1, X.Y.e164.arpa root registry is constantly branded as monopolistic. There can only be one. Some quotes from the public consultation on VoIP services, Ireland (DTI UK consultation responses were similar): [4.2.2. is a clear message] 4.4.1 Summary of consultation issues ENUM allows end-users to have one address string (e.g. a telephone number) that will connect to any termination method of their choice (e.g. VoIP). It has been suggested that specific ENUM numbers be set aside, in order to promote take-up. If this was done, then the thorny problem of validation of the user's right to use a number would be side-stepped, as ENUM sign-up would happen automatically with number allocation. An entire range of numbers (i.e. including a separate access code) could be made available for the use of ENUM should the expected demand be great enough. Alternatively, a sub-range, i.e. using the first (and perhaps the second) digit from a VoIP access code, could be used to denote ENUM numbers. If a user wished to opt-out of ENUM, the right to that ENUM number would be lost. If a user opted out of a telephone line subscription, this would have no impact on their right to continue holding any specific ENUM number. 4.4.2 Views of Respondents The great majority of respondents to the first question above felt that existing E.164 numbers are adequate for ENUM purposes and that the allocation of a new range is not justified. Some respondents felt that this consultation paper is not the appropriate forum for debate on this topic. The answers to the second and third questions therefore need not be considered further, in view of the responses given to the first. 4.4.3 Commission's Position on numbers for ENUM ComReg agrees with the responses received. It is therefore not considered necessary to open a specific range of numbers for the use of ENUM at this time. This topic may be revisited at some stage in the future, if the need arises. Note: ComReg expects to publish a report on the ongoing deliberations of the Irish ENUM forum in October. This report will be available from ComReg's website at http://www.comreg.ie.] -----Original Message----- From: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Richard Shockey Sent: 21 November 2005 02:58 To: hotta(a)jprs.co.jp Cc: Thu Thuy; enum-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: Re: [enum-wg] Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial HiroHOTTA wrote: > Dear Thu Thuy, > > In Japan, ENUM trial will use virtual numbers which are NOT > in the range of actual use. Government does not like to see > numbers that look like actually-used numbers. Thus, 050 or > 0AB numbers will not be used in the trial. Sounds like they have been talking to the USGovt :-) <sigh) > Trial participants (providers) will be given virtual > telephone numbers by the trial secretariat. Those numbers > will have prefix 00, which do not exist as currently-used > numbers. > > Hiro > > On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 16:28:41 +0700 > "Thu Thuy" <thuthuy(a)vnnic.net.vn> wrote: > >>Dears, >> >>I have to investigate model of ENUM trial in countries for my >>report relating to the preparation for ENUM trial in Vietnam. >>However I'm strucking with a question that i can not clear. >>Pls help me. >> >>These trial use existing telephone number in the country >>numbering plan for the trial. In Japan, 050 (IP Telephony), >>mobile number range, geographic telephone number, ext... are >>used. >> >>However, i could not find information to clear my question as >>follow: If the service provider doen't participate in the >>trial, then could their delegated number range be used for >>ENUM trial ? >> >>For example Provider A was delegated 0AB-CDEF-GHJK number >>range. But Proviser A did not participate in the ENUM trial. >>Can their subcribers used the number belonging to this range >>to register ENUM. How can services be provided to ENUM user >>with this number. In this case, could this number range be >>used in ENUM service ? >> >>Pls help me to clarify this. Any more information is very >>useful for me. >> >>Thanks & best regards. >> >>Thu Thuy. >> >> > > -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Director - Member of Technical Staff NeuStar Inc. 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org sip:57141(at)fwd.pulver.com ENUM +87810-13313-31331 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile +1 703.593.2683 Fax: +1 815.333.1237 <mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz> <http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

4 4

Re:[enum-wg] DENIC Launches Productive Phase of ENUM
by 王峰 27 Jan '06

27 Jan '06

hi all, It's a really great news. More commercial ENUM, more better. Hope Denic can obtain much more in commerical applications. Regards, Feng Wang @CNNIC >From: Carsten Schiefner <enumvoipsip.cs(a)schiefner.de> >Reply-To: >To: enum-wg(a)ripe.net >Subject: [enum-wg] DENIC Launches Productive Phase of ENUM >Date:Thu, 26 Jan 2006 12:28:15 +0100 > >Dear colleagues, > > I am happy - and to some extent also proud ;-) - to be able to announce > that as of 23 January 2006, DENIC has moved ENUM for +49 - delegations > under 9.4.e164.arpa - from trial to regular operation. > > Please find the full press release at: > > http://www.denic.de/en/denic/presse/press_73.html > > Best, > > Carsten Schiefner >

1 0

DENIC Launches Productive Phase of ENUM
by Carsten Schiefner 26 Jan '06

26 Jan '06

Dear colleagues, I am happy - and to some extent also proud ;-) - to be able to announce that as of 23 January 2006, DENIC has moved ENUM for +49 - delegations under 9.4.e164.arpa - from trial to regular operation. Please find the full press release at: http://www.denic.de/en/denic/presse/press_73.html Best, Carsten Schiefner

1 0

Game on in competition for +353 Tier-1 ENUM
by Niall O'Reilly 21 Dec '05

21 Dec '05

See http://www.enum.ie/news/ for more information. Best regards, Niall O'Reilly PGP key ID: AE995ED9 (see www.pgp.net) Fingerprint: 23DC C6DE 8874 2432 2BE0 3905 7987 E48D AE99 5ED9

1 0

Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial
by Thu Thuy 03 Dec '05

03 Dec '05

Dears, I have to investigate model of ENUM trial in countries for my report relating to the preparation for ENUM trial in Vietnam. However I'm strucking with a question that i can not clear. Pls help me. These trial use existing telephone number in the country numbering plan for the trial. In Japan, 050 (IP Telephony), mobile number range, geographic telephone number, ext... are used. However, i could not find information to clear my question as follow: If the service provider doen't participate in the trial, then could their delegated number range be used for ENUM trial ? For example Provider A was delegated 0AB-CDEF-GHJK number range. But Proviser A did not participate in the ENUM trial. Can their subcribers used the number belonging to this range to register ENUM. How can services be provided to ENUM user with this number. In this case, could this number range be used in ENUM service ? Pls help me to clarify this. Any more information is very useful for me. Thanks & best regards. Thu Thuy.

4 6

Re: [enum-wg] Australian ENUM trial - mailing list
by Lupton, Ronan 18 Nov '05

18 Nov '05

Vince, congrats. I am guessing that the ENUM trial Oz will be as competitive as the rugby this weekend, versus Ireland. Hopefully though we will lead on the commercial ENUM propositions though. Cheers, R. -----Original Message----- From: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net <enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net> To: 'enum-wg(a)ripe.net' <enum-wg(a)ripe.net> Sent: Thu Nov 17 23:17:11 2005 Subject: [enum-wg] Australian ENUM trial - mailing list Dear All A mailing list for the Australian ENUM trial has just been established. If you would be interested in joining in discussions, please subscribe by logging on at http://www.ausregistry.net.au/mailman/listinfo/enum. Regards... Vince Humphries Australian Communications & Media Authority tel.: +61 3 99 63 68 44 callto:vincehumphries mailto:vince.humphries@acma.gov.au

1 0

Australian ENUM trial - mailing list
by Vince Humphries 18 Nov '05

18 Nov '05

Dear All A mailing list for the Australian ENUM trial has just been established. If you would be interested in joining in discussions, please subscribe by logging on at http://www.ausregistry.net.au/mailman/listinfo/enum <http://www.ausregistry.net.au/mailman/listinfo/enum> . Regards... Vince Humphries Australian Communications & Media Authority tel.: +61 3 99 63 68 44 callto:vincehumphries mailto:vince.humphries@acma.gov.au <mailto:vince.humphries@acma.gov.au>

1 0

Australian ENUM trial - mailing list
by Vince Humphries 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

Dear All A mailing list for the Australian ENUM trial has just been established. If you would be interested in joining in discussions, please subscribe by logging on at http://www.ausregistry.net.au/mailman/listinfo/enum <http://www.ausregistry.net.au/mailman/listinfo/enum> . Regards... Vince Humphries Australian Communications & Media Authority tel.: +61 3 99 63 68 44 callto:vincehumphries mailto:vince.humphries@acma.gov.au <mailto:vince.humphries@acma.gov.au>

1 0

Fwd: ENUM Advertisement (move to commercial ENUM for +353)
by Niall O'Reilly 17 Nov '05

17 Nov '05

Hello, everbody. I'm delighted to pass on the following announcement from ComReg (the regulatory authority in Ireland, as most of you will know). Begin forwarded message: > From: Pat Walsh <pat.walsh(a)COMREG.IE> > Date: 16 November 2005 16:39:10 GMT > To: ENUM-353-IG(a)LISTSERV.HEANET.IE > Subject: ENUM Advertisement > Reply-To: Irish ENUM Interest Group <ENUM-353-IG(a)LISTSERV.HEANET.IE> > > Dear All > > This email is to advise you that ComReg is placing an advertisement in > the national newspapers this Friday to seek expressions of interest > from > organisations interested in offering the single Irish ENUM Tier 1 > Registry function on a commercial basis. The advertisement simply asks > potential candidates to notify ComReg (myself) by 25 November of their > interest. Email is fine for this purpose. > > Call for Proposal documents will be sent to those parties shortly > afterwards, with a return date in 2nd half of December. > > An open competition is being used to select the Registry, with ComReg's > decision following an evaluation of proposals by a small expert > evaluation team. > > Please feel free to pass this information on to any organisation you > think might wish to compete. > > Regards > ______________________________________ > Pat Walsh > Numbering Officer > > Commission for Communications Regulation > Abbey Court Irish Life Centre Lower Abbey Street Dublin 1 Ireland > Telephone: +353 1 804 9690 > Fax : +353 1 804 9671 > Email: pat.walsh(a)comreg.ie <mailto:pat.walsh@comreg.ie> > Visit our new consumer website at http://www.askcomreg.ie > <http://www.askcomreg.ie> > > The information in this email is confidential and may be legally > privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this > email by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended > recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or > omitted to be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be > unlawful. > > /Niall

1 0

Re: [enum-wg] Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial
by Stastny Richard 14 Nov '05

14 Nov '05

Hi, Lawrence Conroy pointed me out that my answer may not be complete regarding your question and he added: ---- If one wants to register an ENUM domain associated with a telephone number, and one's provider is not active in ENUM, then in most countries (i.e. operating under most sets of eligibility rules) one "has problems". This is the common problem with ENUM - the Incumbent will not co- operate (see Telia in .SE, BT in .UK, ...) so the customer has trouble proving that he or she meets the eligibility criteria for ENUM registration. Eligibility is usually defined as proof that a person is provided service via the telephone number associated with an ENUM domain. So... IF there is a requirement to prove that a person has service via a telephone number, then either their provider (who knows this already) can confirm the fact easily and cheaply (i.e. automatically), or other mechanisms must be used to try to show that the telephone number is under the control of the person making the ENUM registration request. These alternatives are often more expensive and complex, and may well discourage individuals from registering ENUM domains in the first place as these are cumbersome or costly. ----- I can only confirm the last statement, and this is one of the reasons why the use of geographic numbers in Austria is preferred for either to be used by enterprises (where the cost for validating the pilot number is neglectible) or to be used by VoIP providers porting the number to VoIP, doing the validation within the porting process anyway. The validation for mobile numbers is easier, because this can be done in an automated way with sending in an SMS For residential subscribers the use of ENUM-only numbers (0780) is preferable, because here no separate number validation is required (the ENUM delegation is the number assignment) regards Richard ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von Stastny Richard Gesendet: Do 10.11.2005 22:12 An: Thu Thuy Cc: enum-wg(a)ripe.net; Irish ENUM Interest Group Betreff: Re: [enum-wg] Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial >When i bring this number to register ENUM record, how >the VoIP service be provided to me through ENUM. Or in that case, i can only >use other kind of services such as mail, fax, web with ENUM registration ? >Or through ENUM, other VoIP provider which offered service for the trial >will provide me service. I think it's not right when two defferent provider >provide same service for same number ? The ENUM domain for the number in e614.arpa is belonging and under control of the end-user. So the end-user is responsible for ALL entries in the domain, which includes the VoIP service. It is basically Bring-Your-Own VoIP provider (same as for e-mail) The VoIP provider you choose needs not to participate in the ENUM trial (or service) at all Of course it makes sense to sell ENUM together with a VoIP account, because normal users are not willing to get into complicated provisioning Richard Stastny ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von Thu Thuy Gesendet: Do 10.11.2005 11:40 An: Niall O'Reilly; Olivier.Girard(a)bakom.admin.ch Cc: enum-wg(a)ripe.net; Irish ENUM Interest Group Betreff: Re: [enum-wg] Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial Hi, O'Reilly, Girard, Thank you for your guide. I know your name, O'Reilly, through quite many presentations i've searched in the Web. I feel glad to talk to you. I now understand the using of numbering for ENUM trial. However, the main point of my concern now is the services provided to ENUM user when their providers do not participate the ENUM trial. Sympathise with me if my technical knowledge is not relevant, as i'm quite new. How are services provided to ENUM registrant if their service provider from which they obtain telephone number doesn't take part in the trial structure. For example, i got a telephone number +050-xxx-xxx from my Japanese VoIP provider, assuming that :). My service provider is not in ENUM trial structure of Japan. When i bring this number to register ENUM record, how the VoIP service be provided to me through ENUM. Or in that case, i can only use other kind of services such as mail, fax, web with ENUM registration ? Or through ENUM, other VoIP provider which offered service for the trial will provide me service. I think it's not right when two defferent provider provide same service for same number ? Pls help me again. BTW, could you pls tell me what kind of services now are offered in your ENUM trial. Kindest regards, Thu Thuy. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Niall O'Reilly" <Niall.oReilly(a)ucd.ie> To: "Thu Thuy" <thuthuy(a)vnnic.net.vn> Cc: "Niall O'Reilly" <Niall.oReilly(a)ucd.ie>; <enum-wg(a)ripe.net>; "Irish ENUM Interest Group" <ENUM-353-IG(a)listserv.heanet.ie> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 5:53 PM Subject: Re: [enum-wg] Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial On 9 Nov 2005, at 09:28, Thu Thuy wrote: > However, i could not find information to clear my question as follow: > If the service provider doen't participate in the trial, then could > their delegated number range be used for ENUM trial ? Hallo, Thu Thuy. This depends on the relevant local practices and regulations. In Ireland (+353), for the trial, any subscriber could approach a Tier-2 registrar and, subject to meeting the validation and eligibility requirements, have her number entered in the 3.5.3.e164.arpa DNS hierarchy. I expect the production regime for +353 will be similar. We had two Tier-2 registrars in the trial, each targeting a not-very-narrowly restricted subscriber group. My university was one of these registrars, and considered "eligible" any member of the "University Community". The trial was not so widely announced that we had to worry about the numbers. For clarity, I should maybe add that UCD is not a telco. 8-) Note that with subscriber opt-in, number ranges are relevant not at the level of allocation to telephone service operators, but only where the subscriber holds a block assignment, as in the case, for example, of a corporate customer. Try dig 6.1.7.1.3.5.3.e164.arpa any and bear in mind that this part of the +353 numbering plan has numbers of the form +353-1-xxx-xxxx. Best regards, Niall O'Reilly University College Dublin Computing Services M: +353 (0)87 221 0237 T: +353 (0)1 716 2360 F: +353 (0)1 283 7077 PGP: AE995ED9 (23DC C6DE 8874 2432 2BE0 3905 7987 E48D AE99 5ED9) SIP: no8(a)iptel.org, 2850*668(a)INOC-DBA.pch.net

2 1

Re: [enum-wg] Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial
by Stastny Richard 10 Nov '05

10 Nov '05

>When i bring this number to register ENUM record, how >the VoIP service be provided to me through ENUM. Or in that case, i can only >use other kind of services such as mail, fax, web with ENUM registration ? >Or through ENUM, other VoIP provider which offered service for the trial >will provide me service. I think it's not right when two defferent provider >provide same service for same number ? The ENUM domain for the number in e614.arpa is belonging and under control of the end-user. So the end-user is responsible for ALL entries in the domain, which includes the VoIP service. It is basically Bring-Your-Own VoIP provider (same as for e-mail) The VoIP provider you choose needs not to participate in the ENUM trial (or service) at all Of course it makes sense to sell ENUM together with a VoIP account, because normal users are not willing to get into complicated provisioning Richard Stastny ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von Thu Thuy Gesendet: Do 10.11.2005 11:40 An: Niall O'Reilly; Olivier.Girard(a)bakom.admin.ch Cc: enum-wg(a)ripe.net; Irish ENUM Interest Group Betreff: Re: [enum-wg] Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial Hi, O'Reilly, Girard, Thank you for your guide. I know your name, O'Reilly, through quite many presentations i've searched in the Web. I feel glad to talk to you. I now understand the using of numbering for ENUM trial. However, the main point of my concern now is the services provided to ENUM user when their providers do not participate the ENUM trial. Sympathise with me if my technical knowledge is not relevant, as i'm quite new. How are services provided to ENUM registrant if their service provider from which they obtain telephone number doesn't take part in the trial structure. For example, i got a telephone number +050-xxx-xxx from my Japanese VoIP provider, assuming that :). My service provider is not in ENUM trial structure of Japan. When i bring this number to register ENUM record, how the VoIP service be provided to me through ENUM. Or in that case, i can only use other kind of services such as mail, fax, web with ENUM registration ? Or through ENUM, other VoIP provider which offered service for the trial will provide me service. I think it's not right when two defferent provider provide same service for same number ? Pls help me again. BTW, could you pls tell me what kind of services now are offered in your ENUM trial. Kindest regards, Thu Thuy. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Niall O'Reilly" <Niall.oReilly(a)ucd.ie> To: "Thu Thuy" <thuthuy(a)vnnic.net.vn> Cc: "Niall O'Reilly" <Niall.oReilly(a)ucd.ie>; <enum-wg(a)ripe.net>; "Irish ENUM Interest Group" <ENUM-353-IG(a)listserv.heanet.ie> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 5:53 PM Subject: Re: [enum-wg] Telephone numbers used in ENUM trial On 9 Nov 2005, at 09:28, Thu Thuy wrote: > However, i could not find information to clear my question as follow: > If the service provider doen't participate in the trial, then could > their delegated number range be used for ENUM trial ? Hallo, Thu Thuy. This depends on the relevant local practices and regulations. In Ireland (+353), for the trial, any subscriber could approach a Tier-2 registrar and, subject to meeting the validation and eligibility requirements, have her number entered in the 3.5.3.e164.arpa DNS hierarchy. I expect the production regime for +353 will be similar. We had two Tier-2 registrars in the trial, each targeting a not-very-narrowly restricted subscriber group. My university was one of these registrars, and considered "eligible" any member of the "University Community". The trial was not so widely announced that we had to worry about the numbers. For clarity, I should maybe add that UCD is not a telco. 8-) Note that with subscriber opt-in, number ranges are relevant not at the level of allocation to telephone service operators, but only where the subscriber holds a block assignment, as in the case, for example, of a corporate customer. Try dig 6.1.7.1.3.5.3.e164.arpa any and bear in mind that this part of the +353 numbering plan has numbers of the form +353-1-xxx-xxxx. Best regards, Niall O'Reilly University College Dublin Computing Services M: +353 (0)87 221 0237 T: +353 (0)1 716 2360 F: +353 (0)1 283 7077 PGP: AE995ED9 (23DC C6DE 8874 2432 2BE0 3905 7987 E48D AE99 5ED9) SIP: no8(a)iptel.org, 2850*668(a)INOC-DBA.pch.net

1 0

Re: Re: [enum-wg] ENUM-capable email client?
by Wang Feng 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

An E.164 number may can considered as an identifier of some person, different applications can get corresponding address information by ENUM resolving. I also think that for MUA it should firstly turn an E.164 number into an appointed Email address, which is convenient to access destined person and also can be flexible to change when needed, not ENUM as a new fixed Email address like +861062619750(a)e164.arpa. Wang Feng fengw(a)cnnic.cn ======= 2005-10-20 14:20:00 ======= >Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Carsten Schiefner: >> >> >>>My question is: is anyone aware of a similar extension or even built-in >>>function of a mail client, so that an E.164 number would be resolved to >>>an email address? >> >> >> Shouldn't this be part of the MTA, and not the MUA? After all, it's >> some kind of mail routing. > >IMO the ENUM lookup should be done in the client before sending the >Email to the MTA. Because if there is no email address asscoiated with >the E.164 phone number, the client can show the problem to the user >immediately, wheras the the MTA would have to generate an error message. > >regards >klaus >

2 1

There are preliinary plans for another ENUM Summit in the US.
by Richard Shockey 01 Nov '05

01 Nov '05

Many of you know there was a "ENUM Summit" Conference earlier this year in Miami that was rather successful. There is another one being held in Frankfurt later in November. http://www.iqpc.com/cgi-bin/templates/singlecell.html?topic=586&event=8382 The Conference organizers have contacted me again to indicate they are planning on the 2nd Annual ENUM Summit in the US with yours truly once again as Conference Chair. Timing as of this date looks like early to mid April so no conflicts with IETF or VON. Venue TBD but I'm pressing for either JFK/LGA, ORD, SFO or possibly BOS. Folks interested in the conference or have speaking proposals should contact. Kerri Hughes IQPC (International Quality & Productivity Center) 535 5th Ave, 8th Floor New York, NY 10017 P: 212-885-2760 * F: 212-885-2762 kerri.hughes(a)iqpc.com www.iqpc.com -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Director - Member of Technical Staff NeuStar Inc. 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org sip:57141(at)fwd.pulver.com ENUM +87810-13313-31331 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile +1 703.593.2683 Fax: +1 815.333.1237 <mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz> <http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

1 0

Re: [enum-wg] ENUM-capable email client?
by chenhui 18 Oct '05

18 Oct '05

Hi Carsten, I have add some comment in your letter as following. Chenhui ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carsten Schiefner" <enumvoipsip.cs(a)schiefner.de> To: <enum-wg(a)ripe.net> Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 9:42 PM Subject: Re: [enum-wg] ENUM-capable email client? > Carsten Schiefner wrote: >> [...] >> >> My question is: is anyone aware of a similar extension or even built-in >> function of a mail client, so that an E.164 number would be resolved to >> an email address? > > In the meantime I have been pointed at: > > http://www.enum.cn/Enum/EnumReg/member.php?language=English > > - has anyone already gained experience with these extensions? Two questions: > > 1) is it generic, i.e. does it work with all IE and Outlook > installations, or does it require a localised-to-chinese version? > Although I am not totally happy with either one of these programs, I do > not have any need for a broken installion... *** We have tested the Windows2000 and XP, IE V5 and newer, it shows ok. BTW, Could you please let me know what is the phenomenon of 'a broken installion'? > > 2) I stumbled over "The number should be registered ENUM number of > www.enum.cn": does it only work with Chinese numbers or is it using the > complete e164.arpa tree for resolution? > ***till now, it only supports Chinese number rule. And we will do the upgrade to let it support many kinds of number rule these days. > Besides that: any other pointers are still welcome, of course! :-) > > Best, > > Carsten

2 1

please help us make the ENUM number range +43 780 a success
by Alexander Mayrhofer 14 Oct '05

14 Oct '05

Hi, as you probably know, Austria has a dedicated ENUM driven number range in place since May 2005: +43 780. Reachability of numbers within this range from the PSTN is good within Austria, but still a patchwork from abroad (as with all new number ranges). it is very hard to debug PSTN connectivity from the receiving end - which is why we are asking you dedicate a few minutes of time and a phone call. To collect the information we've set up a Wiki page: http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/43780 To help us make it better, follow these steps: - take a "conventional" phone line of your choice (PSTN, mobile - the more data points, the better) - call the test number "+43 780 004711" - if you hear the word "ENUM" followed by some elevator music, routing from your telco is ok - perfect! - if it doesn't work, take a note of what happened (announcement, error message, error indication etc.) - leave a note about your success or failure to the wiki page indicated above. If possible, add rate information. - repeat this test for any carrier you have access to. If you detect a failure, and happen to know or work for the telco - please notify the relevant person to fix the problem, it is theirs. We're happy to talk to them if you get us in touch. Thanks for your help - we really appreciate it. Feel free to forward this message to people who might contribute more data points. thanks, Alex Mayrhofer enum.at

1 0

FYI: DENIC Preparing Start of Full-Scale ENUM Operation
by Carsten Schiefner 07 Oct '05

07 Oct '05

Dear colleagues, please find DENIC's press release at: http://www.denic.de/en/denic/presse/press_72.html Best - enjoy your weekend and hope to see you all next week then: Carsten Schiefner

1 0

Draft RIPE 51 ENUM WG agenda
by Schiefner, Carsten 04 Oct '05

04 Oct '05

Dear colleagues, Your co-chairs are pleased at the apparent level of general interest in ENUM, which has led to the inclusion of several ENUM-related presentations in the plenary sessions of RIPE 51. The extended draft agenda of the ENUM WG at RIPE 51 is thus as follows: - Tue, 11 October, 14:00-15:30/90 min Marcos Sanz, DENIC (20 min) 'Reasons for (not) using EPP for ENUM' Adrian Georgescu, AG Projects (20 min) 'ENUM Tier 2 provisioning techniques' Robert Schischka, enum.at, and Bernie Hoeneisen, SWITCH (20 min) 'ENUM validation Schemes and process flow' Panel discussion with the presenters and Andrzej Bartosiewicz, NASK (30 min) - Tue, 11 October, 16:00-16:30/30 min Michael Haberler, IPA/nic.at (30 min) 'Carrier ENUM and VoIP Peering' - Thu, 13 October, 14:00-15:30/90 min A. Preliminaries (5 min) . Welcome . Scribe . Confirm agenda B. Previous Meeting (5 min) . Note and approve minutes . Note open issues, if any C. Carsten Schiefner, Deutsche Telekom (10 min) News summary: . IETF 63 . I-D/RFC watch . DENIC's ENUM day D. Axel Pawlik, RIPE NCC (15 min) Status update of ENUM at the RIPE NCC . Statistics . Tier 0 status . misc E. Jim Reid, DNS-MODA (10 min) Update on the ETSI ENUM Plugtest F. Peter Koch, DENIC (10 min) 'Walking the 9.4.e164.arpa tree: first results' G. Jim Reid, DNS-MODA (10 min) E.164 testbed numbers: per country or directly from the ITU? H. Provisioning, Carrier ENUM and VoIP Peering (10 min) . Arising from plenary . Other, if any : Y. I/O with other WGs, AOB (10 min) Z. Close (5 min) . Summarize action items . Thank scribe and participants Last, but not least: can we kindly ask the presenters to send us a better wording for the title of their respective talk if they feel that the current one (basically made up by your co- chairs) doesn't really hit the spot? Best regards, Carsten Schiefner -- Carsten Schiefner | p: +49 441 234-4571 Deutsche Telekom AG | f: +49 431 7163-3972 T-Com Zentrale TK44 | m: +49 151 14525458 Ammerländer Heerstr. 138 | mailto:Carsten.Schiefner@t-com.net D-26129 Oldenburg | http://www.t-com.de/kundendienst

1 0

Last call for comments on RIPE 50 minutes
by Schiefner, Carsten 29 Sep '05

29 Sep '05

Dear colleagues, this is the last call for comments and/or corrections you may have re. the RIPE 50 ENUM WG draft minutes. The last revision is still also the first revision, available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/enum/minutes/r50-minutes.html The minutes will be finally approved at the RIPE 51 ENUM WG meeting - hope to see you all there. Thanks and best regards, Carsten Schiefner -- Carsten Schiefner | p: +49 441 234-4571 Deutsche Telekom AG | f: +49 431 7163-3972 T-Com Zentrale TK44 | m: +49 151 14525458 Ammerländer Heerstr. 138 | mailto:Carsten.Schiefner@t-com.net D-26129 Oldenburg | http://www.t-com.de/kundendienst

1 0

Dutch ISOC chapter to have an ENUM etc. event
by Carsten Schiefner 15 Sep '05

15 Sep '05

All, the Dutch ENUM chapter will hold a one day ENUM/SIP/VoIP event on Frida, 14 Oct, in The Hague, Netherlands. I am aware that this is in conflict with RIPE 51's plenary session on Friday morning - then again, it is only some 50 minutes by train: so everybody can make it at least for the afternoon... :-) You can find more information at: http://www.isoc.nl/activ/2005-ENUMSIP/ Best regards, Carsten Schiefner

1 1

Re: [enum-wg] Second call for RIPE 51 agenda topics and comments on RIPE 50 minutes
by Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP) 12 Sep '05

12 Sep '05

Hi Richard, Carsten, folks, In reference to EPP vs. SOAP/HTTP, I note the authorship of RFC3205 - given that, calling it stupid is redundant/stating the obvious. Seriously, care to expand on what you see as the differences that make the EPP (client/server) model inappropriate for provisioning? I had thought that the goal was for the Telco customer care system to act as an EPP client, whilst the core ENUM provisioning/ population system acted as the EPP server. That seemed to be the model behind the (delphic) answer when I (and others) asked on the IETF-ENUM list for clarification on why one would ever want EPP-E164, where would it be used, and between whom. On 12 Sep 2005, at 15:36, Richard Shockey wrote: > I can certainly testify to the intense interest in provisioning > issues on this side of the pond. > > In particular we're looking at SOAP/XML interfaces to the > registry. The reason for this is that EPP ( which is a fine > protocol ) was designed for the highly unique business model of > domain name registries and simply will not integrate into the kinds > of customer management systems teleco typically deploy. > > EPP was designed in the manner it is because the IETF has a really > really stupid policy ( RFC 3205 ) on the use of HTTP as a > application substrate. >

2 1

Second call for RIPE 51 agenda topics and comments on RIPE 50 minutes
by Carsten Schiefner 12 Sep '05

12 Sep '05

Dear all, this is the second call for agenda items for the ENUM WG meeting at RIPE 51 in Amsterdam. In the meantime we got some proposals that can be nicely bundled into a "Provisioning" theme. Your co-chairs are happy that such a theme is felt of being of such wide interest that the ENUM WG got a 90 min slot allotted during the plenary part of the meeting, for the presentations and a subsequent panel discussion. However, any other ideas are still very much welcome, too - as usual. :-) Please send in your suggestions and proposals. This is also the second call for comments and/or corrections you may have re. the RIPE 50 ENUM WG draft minutes. The last revision is still also the first revision, available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/enum/minutes/r50-minutes.html Thanks and best regards, Carsten Schiefner

2 1

RIPE Policy Development Process
by Paul Rendek 01 Sep '05

01 Sep '05

Dear Colleagues We are pleased to announce that Rob Blokzijl, RIPE Chair, has published a new RIPE Document, "Policy Development Process in RIPE", (ripe-350). This document formally describes the policy development process. The updated process is operational from today, 1 September 2005. A new RIPE web page describes all the active policy proposals and their status. Each proposal has a page showing its history, status and all supporting documentation. This page can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/index.html A new mailing list <policy-announce(a)ripe.net> has been created for announcing policy proposals and tracking them through the policy development process. This is not a discussion list; discussions will continue to take place on relevant RIPE Working Group lists and at RIPE Meetings. You can subscribe to the policy-announce list at: http://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/policy-announce List archives are available at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/policy-announce/ Kind regards Paul Rendek Head of Member Services and Communications RIPE NCC

1 0

New ENUM software available from .nz
by Alexander Mayrhofer 27 Jul '05

27 Jul '05

There seems to be a new ENUM related open source package available at http://www.internetnz.net.nz/public/enum/index.html I haven't looked into what it provides (yet) - i've just seen from the README that it somehow interacts with Asterisk. More news as we get it - test in progress. cheers axelm

1 0

Fwd: New I/D concerning ENUM validation architecture submitted
by Bernie Hoeneisen 11 Jul '05

11 Jul '05

For those, who are not on the IETF ENUM WG Mailinglist... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:21:19 +0200 (CEST) From: Bernie Hoeneisen <bhoeneis(a)switch.ch> To: enum(a)ietf.org Subject: New I/D concerning ENUM validation architecture submitted Dear ENUM WG, Axel and me have written an I/D, which we consider as the basis for the ENUM validation work currently carried out in the IETF. In this I/D we describe e.g. requirements, ENUM Provisioning Model and Roles, Validation Process Assumptions, and so on. The I/D also reflects experiences from our running implementations. This document can also be used as an introduction to ENUM domain name provisioning and in particular to ENUM validation related processes. Until it appears in the archieves, this I/D can also be downloaded from: * http://www.enum.at/ietf/draft-mayrhofer-enum-validation-arch-00.txt * http://www.enum.at/ietf/draft-mayrhofer-enum-validation-arch-00.html Abstract An ENUM domain name is tightly coupled with the underlying E.164 number. The process of verifying whether or not the Registrant of an ENUM domain name is identical to the Assignee of the corresponding E.164 number is commonly called "validation". This document describes validation requirements and a high level architecture for an ENUM validation infrastructure. cheers, Axel & Bernie

1 0