- enum-wg - mailman.ripe.net

RE: [enum-wg] "production status"?
by Stastny Richard 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

Andrzej, what is strange in Poland is > Operator A has registerd in DNS "1000" E164 number > (0.0.0.1.<cc>.e164.arpa) for his customer C. If customer C registered the "1000" number by himself, as everywhere else, the whole problem would not exist. Richard Richard Stastny OeFEG tel:+43 664 420 4100 enum:+43 780 203 211 callto://fordprefect http://voipandenum.blogspot.com > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of > Andrzej Bartosiewicz > Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 11:16 AM > To: Adrian Georgescu > Cc: enum-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [enum-wg] "production status"? > > Let's imaging the following situation. > > Operator A has registerd in the central database numbering block 1XXX > (1.<cc>.e164.arpa.) > > Operator A has registerd in DNS "1000" E164 number > (0.0.0.1.<cc>.e164.arpa) for his customer C. > > NP is implemented and customer C is porting his number from Operator A to > Operator B > > Finally, customer C is the B's customer for "1000" number and the same > time the (lifelong) Registrar of ENUM number "1000" is... Operator A. > > Customer C MUST always contact Operator A. > > What happens in case of A bankruptcy? > > It sounds strange. > > Andrzej. > > On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Adrian Georgescu wrote: > > > Andrzej, > > > > I cannot imagine how ENUM registrations could be "canceled", as the > > numbers are delegated based on current administrative policies in > > place. > > Should NP be implemented, ENUM can be an enabler. With fixed numbering > > plans like in .ro delegation of each individual number is possible. > > > > Adrian > > > > On Jun 3, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Andrzej Bartosiewicz wrote: > > > > > As I understand ENUM Registry MUST canclel/terminate all the ENUM > > > registration of the numbering blocks after NP implementation in > > > Romania. > > > > > > Additionally Registry should "transfer" all the ENUM domain names from > > > the > > > Registrars (Operators) to the Registry. Am I right? > > > > > > Andrzej > > > > > > On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Adrian Georgescu wrote: > > > > > >> Number portability is not possible at this moment, there are plans > for > > >> the near future. > > >> > > >> On Jun 3, 2005, at 10:13 AM, Andrzej Bartosiewicz wrote: > > >> > > >>> Adrian, > > >>> > > >>>> In Romania operators may apply for entering number ranges that are > > >>>> assigned by the telecom regulator under +40 also into e164.arpa. > > >>>> name > > >>>> space. The operator than assigns the numbers to its customers based > > >>>> on > > >>>> internal procedures. > > >>> > > >>> It lookas like that Number Portability can not be implemented in > > >>> Romania. > > >>> What happens if the number range is assigned to operator and after > > >>> that > > >>> some numbers are ported to anoter operator. > > >>> > > >>> Andrzej. > > >> > >

2 1

RE: [enum-wg] regulator prohibiting current practice of use of +4 9 numbers for voip, update
by Schiefner, Carsten 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

All, > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net > [mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net]On Behalf Of > Carsten Schiefner > Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 9:48 PM > To: enum-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [enum-wg] regulator prohibiting current practice > of use of +49 numbers for voip, update > > [...] > > I'll post the link to the english press release as soon as it becomes > available. here we go: http://www.regtp.de/en/aktuelles/pm/03233/ Best, Carsten -- Carsten Schiefner | p: +49 441 234-4571 Deutsche Telekom T-Com | f: +49 431 7163-3972 TK44 - Network Information Center | Ammerlander Heerstr. 138 | mailto:Carsten.Schiefner@t-com.net D-26129 Oldenburg | http://www.t-com.net

6 13

RE: [enum-wg] "production status"?
by Stastny Richard 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

> Can "legal" also mean "self regulation" or a legal framework via a > "contract"? Hmm, I do not think that "self regulation" can work, because somebody (in most cases the regulator is assigned the Tier 1 CC-domain) so he is the domain name holder. A c.c.e164.arpa is some kind of a "sponsored" domain in ICANN speak, so the domain name holder needs at least a contract with the registry (it is his task to choose one if he does not want to do the job by himself, which is not a good idea). In this contract he would write anything you normally write in an outsourcing contract and also the obligations you want to have fulfilled by the subcontracts (e.g registry - registars, etc) and also the number ranges available and how to treat them. Regards Richard Richard Stastny OeFEG tel:+43 664 420 4100 enum:+43 780 203 211 callto://fordprefect http://voipandenum.blogspot.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Joakim.Stralmark(a)pts.se [mailto:Joakim.Stralmark@pts.se] > Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 10:56 AM > To: Stastny Richard; hotta(a)jprs.co.jp; enum-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: SV: [enum-wg] "production status"? > > Can "legal" also mean "self regulation" or a ledal framework via a > "contract"? > > Joakim Strålmark > Swedish NRA > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net] För Stastny > Richard > Skickat: den 3 juni 2005 10:49 > Till: hotta(a)jprs.co.jp; enum-wg(a)ripe.net > Ämne: Re: [enum-wg] "production status"? > > Hi Hiro, > > none of your points. > > "production" status exists if end-users may subscribe for domains and a > legal framework exists that this subscription is persistent. > > In a trial normally the a subscription is only for the time of the trial > and the user has not right to insist on the service after the trial end > > A legal framework is necessary for "production" because all involved > enties (registry, registars, service providers and customers) want to have > a confirmation that they can build a business on it. > > Especially the point > < it brings money? > is nice. So Amazon is not in production? > > best regards > > Richard > > ________________________________ > > Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von HiroHOTTA > Gesendet: Fr 03.06.2005 07:49 > An: enum-wg(a)ripe.net > Betreff: [enum-wg] "production status"? > > > > Dear all (especially, Austria, Poland, and Romania colleagues), > > I have a question about the progress matrix in RIPE web page. > http://www.centr.org/kim/enum/index.html > There is a status called "production" where Austria, Poland, and Romania > are in. What is the definition of "production status" > in your case? In other words, what aspects of your ENUM services are in > production status in your case? - it brings money? > anybody in the public can use? production-quality system? .....? > > Thanks for your assistance. > > Regards, > Hiro > >

1 0

SV: [enum-wg] "production status"?
by Joakim.Stralmark＠pts.se 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

Can "legal" also mean "self regulation" or a ledal framework via a "contract"? Joakim Strålmark Swedish NRA -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net] För Stastny Richard Skickat: den 3 juni 2005 10:49 Till: hotta(a)jprs.co.jp; enum-wg(a)ripe.net Ämne: Re: [enum-wg] "production status"? Hi Hiro, none of your points. "production" status exists if end-users may subscribe for domains and a legal framework exists that this subscription is persistent. In a trial normally the a subscription is only for the time of the trial and the user has not right to insist on the service after the trial end A legal framework is necessary for "production" because all involved enties (registry, registars, service providers and customers) want to have a confirmation that they can build a business on it. Especially the point < it brings money? is nice. So Amazon is not in production? best regards Richard ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von HiroHOTTA Gesendet: Fr 03.06.2005 07:49 An: enum-wg(a)ripe.net Betreff: [enum-wg] "production status"? Dear all (especially, Austria, Poland, and Romania colleagues), I have a question about the progress matrix in RIPE web page. http://www.centr.org/kim/enum/index.html There is a status called "production" where Austria, Poland, and Romania are in. What is the definition of "production status" in your case? In other words, what aspects of your ENUM services are in production status in your case? - it brings money? anybody in the public can use? production-quality system? .....? Thanks for your assistance. Regards, Hiro

1 0

Re: [enum-wg] "production status"?
by Stastny Richard 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

Hi Hiro, none of your points. "production" status exists if end-users may subscribe for domains and a legal framework exists that this subscription is persistent. In a trial normally the a subscription is only for the time of the trial and the user has not right to insist on the service after the trial end A legal framework is necessary for "production" because all involved enties (registry, registars, service providers and customers) want to have a confirmation that they can build a business on it. Especially the point < it brings money? is nice. So Amazon is not in production? best regards Richard ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin(a)ripe.net im Auftrag von HiroHOTTA Gesendet: Fr 03.06.2005 07:49 An: enum-wg(a)ripe.net Betreff: [enum-wg] "production status"? Dear all (especially, Austria, Poland, and Romania colleagues), I have a question about the progress matrix in RIPE web page. http://www.centr.org/kim/enum/index.html There is a status called "production" where Austria, Poland, and Romania are in. What is the definition of "production status" in your case? In other words, what aspects of your ENUM services are in production status in your case? - it brings money? anybody in the public can use? production-quality system? .....? Thanks for your assistance. Regards, Hiro

1 0

regulator prohibiting current practice of use of +49 numbers for voip, update
by Chris Heinze 24 May '05

24 May '05

hi! we had that some time ago. now it's getting more concrete: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/51877 (german only again, sorry) short summary: regtp (the german regulator) now prohibits (voip) providers in general to give phonenumbers to users that do not live in the area of the respective prefix or have their company located there. this is effective from october 15th. btw: the non-regional prefix under +49 is still not in sight. so - of course :) - i have to mention the 'proposal for non-regional upts available to the general public' again. everyone interested in possible solutions to many voip-specific problems with e.164 numbers should really read this (can be found in the archive of this mailinglist). kind regards, Chris Heinze

2 3

information on numbering plan for ENUM service
by Nguyen Thu Thuy 16 May '05

16 May '05

Hi all folks, Could you kindly share with us information you have about numbering plan used for ENUM trial as well commercial service in countries. We are now investigating and searching information ralating to ENUM deployment around the world in order to prepare our trial. We do need and appreciate your help on finding information about numbering range used for ENUM service in other countries. T&B rgds. Thu Thuy.

2 2

ETSI Documents on ENUM published
by Stastny Richard 11 May '05

11 May '05

Dear all, ETSI has finally published officially the two documents on ENUM already approved at the January 2005 TISPAN Plenary: ETSI TS 102 172 V1.2.1 Telecommunications and Internet converged Services and Protocols for Advanced Networking (TISPAN); Minimum requirements for interoperability of ENUM implementations http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_ID=20591 ETSI TR 102 055 V1.1.1 Telecommunications and Internet converged Services and Protocols for Advanced Networking (TISPAN); ENUM scenarios for user and infrastructure ENUM http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_ID=19572 best regards Richard Stastny _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum(a)ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

1 0

RE: [enum-wg] Australian ENUM trial +61
by Humphries, Vince 07 May '05

07 May '05

Hi Carsten We're looking at re-activating a group mailing list that has been dormant for a year or more -- in principle, it would be a good idea if we had a vehicle for exchanging information now that the trial is about to start. I'll let you know more if and when it's re-activated. Best regards... Vince -----Original Message----- From: Carsten Schiefner To: Humphries, Vince Cc: 'enum-wg(a)ripe.net' Sent: 5/7/05 3:45 AM Subject: Re: [enum-wg] Australian ENUM trial +61 Hi Vince, Humphries, Vince wrote: > [...] > There is a mailing list for the group, but to date it has only dealt with > administrative matters. [...] are there plans to set up a list for the general public, e.g. for information exchange of and with the trial participants? Congrats for the trial launch, BTW. :-) Best, Carsten

1 0

RE: [enum-wg] Australian ENUM trial +61
by Humphries, Vince 06 May '05

06 May '05

Dear Carsten There is an Australian ENUM Discussion Group that meets to discuss and advise on the framework for the Australian ENUM trial; its web page is at http://internet.aca.gov.au/ACAINTER.65650:STANDARD:1078325456:pc=PC_2319. There is a mailing list for the group, but to date it has only dealt with administrative matters. The next meeting is scheduled for the 17th of May and is expected to be devoted to the launch of the Australian trial, the operation of the Tier 1 Registry, and rights of use of numbers that are registered in ENUM. Let me know if you'd like any further information on this. Regards... Vince Humphries Australian Communications Authority -----Original Message----- From: Carsten Schiefner [mailto:enumvoipsip.cs@schiefner.de] Sent: Wednesday, 27 April 2005 16:17 To: 'enum-wg(a)ripe.net' Subject: Re: [enum-wg] Australian ENUM trial +61 Dear Vince, Humphries, Vince wrote: > Dear Carsten > > I'm afraid I can't give you details until next Thursday, when an > announcement will be made by the company that has been selected to run > the Tier 1 Registry for the Australian ENUM trial. I'll post some > information about the trial on this list at the end of next week. thanks for the update - let's wait patiently then. :-) BTW: do you know if there is some mailing lists or other public fora being set up? Best, Carsten

2 1