Re: [#XWM-610908]: Re: [enum-wg] ENUM Adoption - Does a business c ase matter?
Hi crue is not currently deployed within the uk - there is some debate about whether the 'carriers' in the uk are not loading the database for technical or commercial reasons. If it is the case that paying for each individual end user registration is just to expensive for a CP to bulk load, then whether a computer program loads blocks of naptr records or a million individual ones, is, in my opinion, irrelivant, and we just need to fix the registry business model. Cheers Peter Ukec director who owns a voip provider who is looking for the enum business case! --- original message --- From: Carsten Schiefner <enumvoipsip.cs@schiefner.de> Subject: Re: [#XWM-610908]: Re: [enum-wg] ENUM Adoption - Does a business case matter? Date: 22nd July 2009 Time: 11:47:27 am Hello Christian, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
Coudl you please elaborate a bit here? Do you call for regulators to make ENUM mandatory?
I am saying that when an E.164 is allocated (to an operator) by a regulator it should be entered into the ENUM tree even it simply returns the tel: uri for the number itself.
I see: like the CRUE principle (http://www.ukec.co.uk/docs/CRUE.pdf) deployed in the UK tree 4.4.e164.arpa - am I correct? Best regards, Carsten
Peter The fact that CRUE is not deployed speaks volumes. It sounds like it is time to review ENUM in the UK. As 4.4. is delegated to Nominet how do you think (UKEC) this can be conducted to achieve a happy outcome? In particular bearing in mind that ENUM is or should be in the user's control. Christian On 22 Jul 2009, at 20:26, peter@gradwell.com wrote:
Hi
crue is not currently deployed within the uk - there is some debate about whether the 'carriers' in the uk are not loading the database for technical or commercial reasons.
If it is the case that paying for each individual end user registration is just to expensive for a CP to bulk load, then whether a computer program loads blocks of naptr records or a million individual ones, is, in my opinion, irrelivant, and we just need to fix the registry business model.
Cheers Peter
Ukec director who owns a voip provider who is looking for the enum business case!
--- original message --- From: Carsten Schiefner <enumvoipsip.cs@schiefner.de> Subject: Re: [#XWM-610908]: Re: [enum-wg] ENUM Adoption - Does a business case matter? Date: 22nd July 2009 Time: 11:47:27 am
Hello Christian,
Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
Coudl you please elaborate a bit here? Do you call for regulators to make ENUM mandatory?
I am saying that when an E.164 is allocated (to an operator) by a regulator it should be entered into the ENUM tree even it simply returns the tel: uri for the number itself.
I see: like the CRUE principle (http://www.ukec.co.uk/docs/CRUE.pdf) deployed in the UK tree 4.4.e164.arpa - am I correct?
Best regards,
Carsten
participants (2)
-
Christian de Larrinaga -
peter＠gradwell.com