Hi Jim, you disappoint me a bit - I have counted on your contribution much earlier! ;-> On 28.08.2012 12:34, Jim Reid wrote:
[...]
So, the ENUM federation could also be a good place to initiate a discussion about a change in this regulation scheme, for example.
Carsten, I wish you and the ENUM Federation every success. However I fear you're flogging a very dead horse. User ENUM is dead. If the ENUM Federation can bring it back to life, good luck! If the ENUM Federation can do that, could you please revive the hamburger meat in my fridge and turn it back into a live cow again? :-)
You want to have a cow in your fridge?! How unusual... ;->
["ownership" of an E.164 number]
[call termination charges]
[(non-) disclosure of details of their key infrastructure]
[chicken-and-egg problems with ENUM-aware applications and services]
These are all valid arguments that have been considered already and are most likely to be reconsidered again. Still, at this very point, I see - and you may call me a Pollyanna here! :-) - more momentum with ENUM of various flavours than in quite a period of time before. And some activities carried out by the ENUm Federation will hopefully add to this. Cheers and all the best, -C.