On 27 Jul 2009, at 16:23, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
When this idea started out in the UKEG I recall it was discussed in terms of a way to help VoIP service providers gain new (and only new) local number ranges to route over IP and to them through TDM gateways.
Not quite. The initial motivation was bulk population of 4.4.e164.arpa. That was clearly explained in the CRUE documents I authored 4-5 years ago. This was also the motivation of the people in UKEG/UKETG who kicked around the original ideas that were then written up. The rationale was that if there was significant amounts of meaningful data in the tree, there would be an incentive for providers to do ENUM lookups. That in turn might encourage more ENUM-aware applications and services to be deployed. It was felt that VoIP providers might want to use CRUE as a way to avoid paying termination charges for inbound calls from the PSTN. But this was a second order effect. Another side- effect of CRUE was simplification of the authentication and validation issues: a VoIP provider could issue an {ENUM-only?) number to a customer, eliminating the need someone to prove they "owned" that number.