BTW, ALL enumservices used by Kapsch are non-IETF standard but they are ETSI TS 102 172 standard ;-) Richard -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP) [mailto:lwc@roke.co.uk] Gesendet: Mi 06.10.2004 15:01 An: Michael Haberler Cc: Stastny Richard; Angerer Christian; Jakob Schlyter; enum-wg@ripe.net Betreff: Re: [enum-wg] Kapsch CarrierCom first company to be reached with ENUM Jakob, folks, Tempting as it is to utter a two word response, there is a well known issue with 3264 - to "allow backwards compatibility" (i.e. not make a certain large Router manufacturer's kit obsolescent overnight), you can use sip+E2U as well, so ETSI versus IETF is the least of your problems. We now return you to the adverts. Lawrence On 6 Oct 2004, at 13:27, Michael Haberler wrote: > At 14:15 06.10.2004, Jakob Schlyter wrote: > >> I'm happy to see people deploying this, especially for companies. >> >> on the technical side, do you know why Kapsch uses non-standard NAPTR >> like E2U+voice:sip instead of the one specified by RFC 3764 >> (E2U+sip)? >> >> jakob > > no religious issues here;) the fix as per above is in the code waiting > for the next build > > -Michael -- Visit our website at www.roke.co.uk Roke Manor Research Ltd, Roke Manor, Romsey, Hampshire SO51 0ZN, UK. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential to Roke Manor Research Ltd and must not be passed to any third party without permission. This communication is for information only and shall not create or change any contractual relationship.