Hello Bernie, 1. There is interest in EPP provisioning from Tier 2 to Tier1. So far there are at least 3 implementations I know of (AU, PL and CH) and standardizing such interfaces is a very good thing 2. It would have been very useful if you would have come to the ENUM Plugtest held by ETSI last week I will look at your implementation and hopeful we can build a client to test with your implementation. The lack of feedback is caused mostly by the slow speed of ENUM adoption in the regulatory area. Your work is definitely not in vain, you are yet another early bird with a wonderful ENUM system that WORKS ! Adrian On Jun 6, 2005, at 4:54 PM, Bernie Hoeneisen wrote:
Hi!
As some of you know, in the IETF, there is some work on-going concerning ENUM and validation of E.164 numbers. At the IETF-62 in Minneapolis. the draft referred below has been approved as a Working Group item of the IETF ENUM WG:
Abstract
This document describes an EPP extension framework for mapping information about the validation process that has been applied for the E.164 number (or number range), which the ENUM domain name is based on. Specified in XML, this mapping extends the EPP domain name mapping to provide an additional feature required for the provisioning of ENUM domain names.
URLs
* http://ietf.hoeneisen.ch/draft-hoeneisen-enum-validation-epp-01.txt * http://ietf.hoeneisen.ch/draft-hoeneisen-enum-validation-epp-01.html
In Switzerland we are running an EPP Server including this extension for the ENUM Tier-1 Registry. So far we did not run into any trouble.
I am about to write an update of this draft. So far I have not received any feedback. Does this mean, that everything in there is just fine or that people are not interested / have not read it at all? ;-)
Besides the technical and other feedback, I'd be interested: - Who is planning to use this EPP extension for ENUM? - Who cannot use this extensions and what are the reasons?
Looking forward for lots of comments!
cheers, Bernie Hoeneisen, Switch, Project Manager ENUM