Dear ENUM WG colleagues - email address auto-completion is not always your friend, it seems. I am sure that it has happened to at least some of you already: now I got hit by it, too. The distribution list should have actually been read <enum-wg-CHAIRS@ripe.net> instead of just <enum-wg@ripe.net> - my sincerest apologies, please ignore my posting below at least for the time being. I am sure that we will have a short notion or update on it under AOB of the upcoming ENUM WG session of the RIPE 65 meeting. All the best, Carsten Schiefner RIPE ENUM WG Co-Chair On 27.08.2012 16:56, Carsten Schiefner wrote:
Distribution List:
+> bod@enumfederation.org +> ???, enum.at (Austria) +> Pavel Tuma, CZ.NIC (Czech Republic) +> Joerg Schweiger, DENIC (Germany) +> ???, SIDN (Netherlands) +> ???, nominet (United Kingdom)
+> enum-wg@ripe.net +> Niall O'Reilly, RIPE ENUM WG Co-Chair +> Carsten Schiefner, RIPE ENUM WG Co-Chair
+> Patrik Fältström, ENUM inventor
===
Dear all -
first of all, I do hope that you all have had some lovely holidays and could relax and recharge batteries!
As you may be aware, I have had some multilateral, but also bilateral talks with some of you wrt. the ENUM Federation and particularly its website at:
http://www.enumfederation.org/
As I got it, there have recently some ideas been floated around amongst the BoD members about a very last attempt to give the idea behind the Federation a push.
Reasons are, amongst others, that ENUM in the Carrier space gets more and more grip, but also in the public name space with the advent of the NRENUM activities.
But although the registration of a phone number as an ENUM domain bears quite some similarity with the usual registration of a domain under a TLD, there is at least one crucial thing that might actually hinder a massive take-up in registration figures, even if all other preconditions are fully in place: that is that the registrant would never fully "own" a number where the ENUM domain is derived from - contrary to a classic domain name. There is carrier and geopgraphic number portability in place, of course - however, if one cancels the PSTN service the number comes with the number goes away too.
So, the ENUM federation could also be a good place to initiate a discussion about a change in this regulation scheme, for example.
Anyhow: I'd see such (re)launch activities quite complementary to what is usually being discussed and done in the ENUM WG, as the focus of the Federaion is much more on the actual promotion of ENUM in a commercial sense, if I am correct.
I would be happy to take this up - and what I have heard from Niall sounds very similar. So please consider this email a kick-off to start some meaningful debate how it shoud be proceeded.
All the best,
Carsten