Re: [enum-wg] Kapsch CarrierCom first company to be reached with ENUM (questionable)
ENUM is 3761 - so just one digit mixed up; and they even look almost the same. :-)
Happens to me all the time, too...
;-)
also, I work in a company that has ENUM enabled. You can call me (+49 7031 73009) via ENUM from the internet and I certainly have no SIP URI.
So what kind of URI you are using then - "h323:"? Or "tel:", so that it is about Internet->PSTN termination?
If you look up this domain, you do not find any NAPTR, (only TXT records) so how can I call you? Richard
hi! first of all - the mail richard and carsten are refering to wasn't sent to the ml? i didn't receive it and didn't find it in the archives...
If you look up this domain, you do not find any NAPTR, (only TXT records) so how can I call you?
well i found naptr records in that domain and they're pointing towards an h.323 gw. e.g.: 1.9.0.0.3.7.1.3.0.7.9.4.e164.arpa order = 100, preference = 100 flags = "u" services = "E2U+h323:voice" rule = "!^\+49703173009(.*)$!h323:\1@gw-amt.innovaphone.com!" replacement = (root) just a thought on some other issues in this thread: voip expanded is voice over ip. so e.g. opening an rtp stream is voip, just like 'cat /dev/audio | ssh remote.host -c "cat - > /dev/audio"' would be voip. to refer to sip i recommend using the word 'sip', or for sip in conjunction with enum i recommend using 'sip with enum' or something like that. and while we're at it: this naptr-stuff is a technical concept. maybe the following is true for me only because i'm one of the technical people, but i need names for technical concepts, and i need them to be kept strictly separate from political stuff. so when i say 'enum' i will most probably be refering to the technical concept, what i mean will be the dns-naptr concept for tElephone NUmber Mapping. also, when i hear 'enum' i don't take for granted that this means e164.arpa is used, because in practice that would simply be foolish. whether e164.arpa or this.domain.is.better is used also is not relevant for this, just like it's a different question whether a naptr points to sip or h.323 or maybe tincans. other people might see this differently ofc, but just as i don't ignore them as i know that the rfc is suboptimal in this point, i think to be taken serious enum used with other domains than e164.arpa can't be ignored either. and insisting in people saying 'enum-like' or 'enum with a different domain than e164.arpa' simply doesn't work, i guess even changing the rfc would be more feasible... and BTW: yes, i think not using e164.arpa for enum is generally a not too bright idea... and yes, i do support sip (with assistance of enum) as voip protocol. kind regards, Chris Heinze
Hi Chris, Chris Heinze wrote:
hi!
first of all - the mail richard and carsten are refering to wasn't sent to the ml? i didn't receive it and didn't find it in the archives...
they are probably still held for moderation as the sender may not be subscribed - I flagged NCC folks already and hope to see these postings here any time soon.
[...] and BTW: yes, i think not using e164.arpa for enum is generally a not too bright idea... and yes, i do support sip (with assistance of enum) as voip protocol.
Thanks for this clarification! ;-) Regards, -C.
participants (3)
-
Carsten Schiefner -
Chris Heinze -
Stastny Richard