- enum-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: [enum-wg] ITU: debate over User-ENUM administration
by Stastny Richard 08 Feb '05

08 Feb '05

John writes: >there is a case to be made that the SG2 >management becomes part of the problem when they put these >things on the agenda rather than ruling them out of order. I think you do not know how ITU-T works (maybe having in mind some other bodies) I can only fully agree here with Andrzej: . >Delegate of Syria submitted his contributions. It's his right. Every >government (Member State) or Sector Member can submit his contributions, and >the discussion can go forward. In addition, Mr. Kisrawi is not questioning ENUM or e164.arpa in his contribution, he is only questioning the legal status of the domain name holder of e164.arpa, namely: Internet Architecture Board (IAB) c/o IETF Secretariat Corporation for National Research Initiatives (CNRI) 1895 Preston White Drive Suite 100 Reston, Virginia 20191-5434 He is also questioning the legal status of .arpa and finally the root servers, which is IMHO a valid question. He is also fully aware of the de-facto role of the DoC and he is also proposing a feasible way forward: "The final problem is more serious. ICANN cannot, on its own, make changes in the root server system. ICANN proposes changes, which are approved by the United States Department of Commerce (DoC). Once the change is approved, DoC transmits it to Verisign, who implements the change in what is commonly called the "hidden root server" (located within the United States and under US jurisdiction). The change is then automatically propagated to all other root servers around the world. Thus, DoC could change the entity to whom "arpa" is delegated, and this could result in loss of ITU's administrative control. A possible solution could be a formal bilateral agreement between the USA, a Sovereign State, and the ITU." So Mr. Kisrawi raises a valid question in asking the ITU-T to make sound legal contracts for important infrastructure issues best regards Richard Stastny ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von John C Klensin Gesendet: Sa 05.02.2005 20:45 An: Richard Shockey; Andrzej Bartosiewicz; enum-wg(a)ripe.net Cc: paf(a)cisco.com; Leslie Daigle; sob(a)harvard.edu; swinehart(a)icann.org Betreff: Re: [enum-wg] ITU: debate over User-ENUM administration Richard, I agree with everything you say, with two qualifications... (1) I'm not sure the world revolves around North America and the NANP. Indeed, I consider that attitude to be harmful to the Internet and the IETF, regardless of what things look like from the vicinity of the beltway. (2) Since said permanent delegate of Syria submits these things to SG2 and then uses the fact that they have been put on the agenda as motivation for arguing in other forums that this is an area under ITU control, there is a case to be made that the SG2 management becomes part of the problem when they put these things on the agenda rather than ruling them out of order. I understand at least some of the constraints under which they operate, but you should understand why, given that and the behavior patterns of the last several years, I don't completely share your confidence. john --On Saturday, 05 February, 2005 14:28 -0500 Richard Shockey <richard(a)shockey.us> wrote: > >> >> Hi. >> >> I wonder how you (or we) should define "progress"? We start >> with an area that was originally agreed to be an IETF >> responsibility with TSB participation on >> authorization/validation issues. It then "evolves", at SG2 >> insistence, to something that is assumed to involve at least >> some topics we should discuss together. And now we have >> attained the pinnacle of a discussion within SG2, >> apparently-secret from the outside world, based on documents >> that are not generally available to the IETF and the ENUM user >> community. >> >> And, of course, unless ITU-T SG2 is planning to disrupt the >> Internet by setting up an alternate root, their deciding on an >> ENUM TLD is only slightly more likely to be relevant than >> their passing a Recommendation that changes the speed of >> light. >> >> Leslie, Scott, can these documents be obtained and released to >> the IETF ENUM WG and interested members of the community so >> that we can further evaluate the level of progress? > > Attached ... > > However considering the source of these documents ..the well > known Permanant Delegate of Syria to the ITU I'm not overly > concerned about their impact, but this requires careful > monitoring. John I'm in total agreement the principle that > the price of the Internet freedom is eternal vigilance . > > I have some ... some ..confidence in SG-2 management to "do > the right thing" here and in any event. IMHO the most > important task for the global ENUM community to accomplish is > getting the delegation for 1.e164.arpa to North America ASAP > and commence short lived trials that will lead to commercial > deployment. > > Once that is done I think we would have sent a message that > e164.apra is real and that further discussions on the matter > of a different root are futile. > > That process is well underway.. discussions over how the ENUM > LLC management entity will act are taking place almost weekly > . I'm also very confident that there well be responsible,open > ,and competitive bidding processes for both the US and > Canadian portions of the NANP within the late 2005 very early > 2006 time frame. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology > Initiatives > NeuStar Inc. > 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 > sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org sip:57141@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] ITU: debate over User-ENUM administration
by Stastny Richard 08 Feb '05

08 Feb '05

Christian wrote: > (e.g., ENUM has nothing to do with assignment of E.164 > numbers or national number plans) Huh? On which planet are you living on? Richard

1 0

Re: [enum-wg] ITU: debate over User-ENUM administration
by Jim Reid 07 Feb '05

07 Feb '05

>>>>> "Andrzej" == Andrzej Bartosiewicz <andrzejb(a)nask.pl> writes: Andrzej> Unfortunately that's true that ICANN has no legal power Andrzej> over Root Server administrators (ICANN failed in signing Andrzej> the agreements with root servers administrators)... That's actually a good thing IMO. The root server operators are very careful to avoid single points of failure. That applies to procedural, contractual and financial aspects of the running root server system as well as the technical and operational ones. If all the root server operators signed the same contract with ICANN, that contract would be a single point of failure. This thread is getting off topic for this list.

1 0

ITU: debate over User-ENUM administration
by Andrzej Bartosiewicz 07 Feb '05

07 Feb '05

ITU is making progress in debate on ENUM: Group : itu-t updated : 2005-02-01 23:58:06 title : [ D 20 ] Administrative control for ENUM url : http://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.asp?lang=e <http://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.asp?lang=e&parent=T05-SG02-050216-D-0020&t ype=mitems> &parent=T05-SG02-050216-D-0020&type=mitems Group : itu-t updated : 2005-02-03 23:58:05 title : [ TD 32-WP1 ] Evaluation of a new gTLD exclusively for Global ENUM implementation url : http://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.asp?lang=e <http://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.asp?lang=e&parent=T05-SG02-050216-TD-WP1-0 032&type=mitems> &parent=T05-SG02-050216-TD-WP1-0032&type=mitems Documents available only for TIES (ITU) users. Andrzej.

3 6

Re: [enum-wg] ITU: debate over User-ENUM administration
by Stastny Richard 04 Feb '05

04 Feb '05

Progress? Richard ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von Andrzej Bartosiewicz Gesendet: Fr 04.02.2005 12:35 An: enum-wg(a)ripe.net Betreff: [enum-wg] ITU: debate over User-ENUM administration ITU is making progress in debate on ENUM: Group : itu-t updated : 2005-02-01 23:58:06 title : [ D 20 ] Administrative control for ENUM url : http://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.asp?lang=e&parent=T05-SG02-050216-D-0020&t… Group : itu-t updated : 2005-02-03 23:58:05 title : [ TD 32-WP1 ] Evaluation of a new gTLD exclusively for Global ENUM implementation url : http://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.asp?lang=e&parent=T05-SG02-050216-TD-WP1-0… Documents available only for TIES (ITU) users. Andrzej.

1 0

WG: [Iptel] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-iptel-tel-enumdi-00.txt
by Stastny Richard 03 Feb '05

03 Feb '05

FYI ________________________________ Von: iptel-bounces(a)ietf.org im Auftrag von Internet-Drafts(a)ietf.org Gesendet: Do 03.02.2005 21:56 An: i-d-announce(a)ietf.org Cc: iptel(a)ietf.org Betreff: [Iptel] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-iptel-tel-enumdi-00.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IP Telephony Working Group of the IETF. Title : The ENUM Dip Indicator parameter for the "tel" URI Author(s) : R. Stastny, L. Conroy Filename : draft-ietf-iptel-tel-enumdi-00.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2005-2-3 This document defines a new parameter "enumdi" in the "tel" Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) as defined in RFC3966 to support the handling of ENUM queries in SIP proxies, H.323 gatekeepers and other VoIP network elements. The presence of the "enumdi" parameter indicates to the VoIP network element receiving an URI containing an E.164 number that an ENUM query as defined in RFC3761 has already been performed on the E.164 number indicated by the previous VoIP network element. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-tel-enumdi-00.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request(a)ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-iptel-tel-enumdi-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv(a)ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-tel-enumdi-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft.

1 0

WG: [Enum] Working Group Last Call on Enumservice Registration VOID
by Stastny Richard 03 Feb '05

03 Feb '05

FYI Richard ________________________________ Von: enum-bounces(a)ietf.org im Auftrag von Richard Shockey Gesendet: Do 03.02.2005 17:33 An: enum(a)ietf.org Cc: paf(a)cisco.com; Jon Peterson; mankin(a)psg.org Betreff: [Enum] Working Group Last Call on Enumservice Registration VOID This draft is sufficiently easy to understand that this can proceed immediately to last call. I've noted no substantive issues with it. The intent of the last call is to solicit comments before submitting the ID to the IESG as a Proposed Standard. The purpose of a working group Last Call is in the style of "speak now or forever hold your peace" in case there are fundamental objections which have not gotten previous or adequate discussion, or minor errors which need correction. Work group last call will extend for 2 weeks or so from today Feb 3 to at least Feb 21 though we can modify that if new issues come up. Title : IANA Registration for Enumservice VOID Author(s) : R. Stastny, L. Conroy Filename : draft-ietf-enum-void-00.txt Pages : 0 Date : 2004-10-12 This document registers the Enumservice 'void' using the URI schemes 'mailto:' and 'http:' as per the IANA registration process defined in the ENUM specification, RFC3761. This Enumservice may be used to indicate that the E.164 number (or E.164 number range) tied to the domain in which the enclosing NAPTR is published is not assigned for communications service. When such an indication is provided, an ENUM client can detect calls that will fail "early". A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-enum-void-00.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org sip:57141@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> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum(a)ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

1 0

ITU-T/ENUM/NP
by Andrzej Bartosiewicz 26 Jan '05

26 Jan '05

Dear All, I would like to draw your attention to the ITU SG-2 activities regarding Number Portability. It seems that SG2 (thanks to Marco Bernardi from NeuStar) of ITU-T will be considering Infrastructure-ENUM as potential solution for Number Portability Database. I'm very glad because this is the idea I have been promoting in Poland for the last year... :) Group : itu-t title : [ D 9 ] Draft Number Portability Supplement url : http://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.asp?lang=e&parent=T05-SG02-050216-D-0009&ty pe=mitems Best, Andrzej.

1 0

Two ETSI drafts on ENUM approved today
by Stastny Richard 21 Jan '05

21 Jan '05

Dear all, http://voipandenum.blogspot.com/2005/01/two-etsi-drafts-on-enum-approved-to… ETSI <http://portal.etsi.org> TISPAN WG4 finished 2 drafts on User ENUM <http://enum.nic.at/documents/ETSI/Drafts/05TD142r3%20DTS_102172v020006.pdf> and on Infrastructure ENUM <http://enum.nic.at/documents/ETSI/Drafts/05TD143r4%20Draft%20TR_102055v008.…> (Carrier ENUM) this week and got workgroup and TISPAN plenary approval today. ETSI DTS 102 172 V2 <http://enum.nic.at/documents/ETSI/Drafts/05TD142r3%20DTS_102172v020006.pdf> "Minimum requirements for interoperability of ENUM implementations" contains general guidance on (User) ENUM implementations as defined in RFC3761 and in ETSI TS 102 051 "ENUM Administration in Europe" and the specification for: * The format, contents and meaning of the information in the NAPTR records that are held by the ENUM Tier 2 Nameserver providers and accessible by DNS. * The ways in which ENUM client software should interpret and act upon information obtained from NAPTR records. The document is intended to enable interoperability between ENUM implementations that are organized in different countries. This interoperability enables: * The same ENUM client software to work with NAPTR records generated by different national implementations and this in turn will enable applications that use ENUM to access details of ENUM subscribers in more than one country without additional modifications. * Organizations to function as ENUM Registrars and ENUM Tier 2 Nameserver Provider in more than one national implementation. The document will therefore add economies of scope to the ENUM implementations that will benefit ENUM subscribers, providers, application service providers and ENUM users. The present document is Version 2 of the Technical Specification (TS) and incorporates already some results obtained from trials performed in some countries. It may serve therefore also as a basis for first commercial deployments, keeping in mind that still not all enumservices are available as IETF RFCs and registered with IANA. The intention is to review this document based on the experience gained from future implementations and if necessary. ETSI DTR 102 055 <http://enum.nic.at/documents/ETSI/Drafts/05TD143r4%20Draft%20TR_102055v008.…> "Infrastructure ENUM" This document identifies a range of issues which occur if providers of communication services and networks (called Communication Service Providers (CSP) within this document) consider using the concepts developed in RFC 3761 (ENUM) for infrastructure purposes. Such an approach would result in the application of the ENUM concept to the provision of information for routeing (both internally and for the interconnection of networks - also called peering), including information for number portability, freephone and other number or address translation capabilities, SMS and MMS, etc. It considers the likely steps along the way and where possible, identifies alternative options and approaches. It will specifically identify: * issues which occur if providers of IMS-based NGNs consider peering traffic with each other via Points-of-Interconnect based on IP technology, by using E.164 numbers to address end-points they are hosting for their subscribers, * issues which occur if providers of IMS-based NGNs consider peering traffic with other providers e.g. IMS-based PLMNs and also with providers on the Internet. Out-of-scope are requirements for using Infrastructure ENUM for peering of transit traffic not targeted for end-points within the providers control. regards Richard Stastny

1 0

Re: [enum-wg] Kim's document
by Stastny Richard 21 Jan '05

21 Jan '05

Hi Kim, may I point BTW to two major errors 1. Austria is in production since Dezenber 2004 2. The request from Australia is not objected (this is also wrong on the RIPE page: http://www.ripe.net/enum/request-archives/index.html see http://www.ripe.net/maillists/ncc-archives/enum-announce/2005/msg00001.html regards Richard ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von Andrzej Bartosiewicz Gesendet: Fr 21.01.2005 15:06 An: 'Kim Davies' Cc: enum-wg(a)ripe.net Betreff: RE: [enum-wg] Kim's document Thanks Kim. > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of > Kim Davies > Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 2:52 PM > To: Andrzej Bartosiewicz > Cc: enum-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [enum-wg] Kim's document > > Andrzej Bartosiewicz wrote: > > The link http://www.centr.org/kim/enum/index.html is broken. > > > > Is there anybody who has the copy of this document? > > This page is working again. Had some server difficulties a few weeks > back and didn't think to check it. > > kim

1 0