Re: AW: [enum-wg] COCOM & ENUM ...
"Richard" == Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us> writes:
>> Carrier-based ENUM is probably the easiest (maybe not the best) >> way to protect the privacy of customer data. Richard> Which BTW is why it is a good idea to keep it out of Richard> e164.arpa EH? The choice of domain name has no impact on whether that bit of the name space is public. Or private. It's all down to what data goes on what name servers and where those name servers are located (or accept queries from). Richard> ..maybe the carriers will go back to the ITU and get Richard> e164.int and we can end this issue once and for all. Hmm... How long do you think it would take ITU to set up processes and cost-recovery mechanisms for this? IIUC ITU has still not decided whether ENUM should be anchored in the public e164.arpa infrastructure or a new TLD owned and operated by ITU. According to IANA, it's the IANA registry that manages .int, not the ITU. BTW the DNS infrastructure for .int is nowhere near the levels of robustness and global presence that .arpa has.
At 02:57 PM 12/14/2004, Jim Reid wrote:
"Richard" == Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us> writes:
>> Carrier-based ENUM is probably the easiest (maybe not the best) >> way to protect the privacy of customer data.
Richard> Which BTW is why it is a good idea to keep it out of Richard> e164.arpa
EH? The choice of domain name has no impact on whether that bit of the name space is public. Or private. It's all down to what data goes on what name servers and where those name servers are located (or accept queries from).
Yes but that is not the issue here ..none of this is about the DNS. This all about policies and procedures of who can write authoritative records that represent mappings from TN's to URI's and why. Its all political not technical but we've known that from the beginning. Its just now carriers have switched to caffinated coffee and realized VoIP is no toy but a real and direct threat to their revenue steams and more importantly its important to their customers. 1/2 of all PBX's sold in North America were VoIP enabled. The must act or their land line businesses will be rendered useless. How many times has Skype been downloaded? Again I'm very sympathetic to the problem and would like to help design solutions for carriers that address their needs but at the same time I dont want the fundamental technical architecture of 3761 to be corrupted by requirements that place the square pegs of carrier network needs in the round holes of e164.arpa.
Richard> ..maybe the carriers will go back to the ITU and get Richard> e164.int and we can end this issue once and for all.
Hmm... How long do you think it would take ITU to set up processes and cost-recovery mechanisms for this? IIUC ITU has still not decided whether ENUM should be anchored in the public e164.arpa infrastructure or a new TLD owned and operated by ITU.
Well the arpa issue as far as I can see is essentially over. No one in North America aka CC1 is going to countence to ITU control here unless they want to do something seperately for the carriers. and how long would it take to set something up ... Oh the ITU is definitely looking for work these days and I'm constantly amazed at the speed the ITU will act if ..if they set their minds to something. If the ITU proposed setting up e164.int for global service provider needs I'd be the first to support the proposition.
According to IANA, it's the IANA registry that manages .int, not the ITU. BTW the DNS infrastructure for .int is nowhere near the levels of robustness and global presence that .arpa has.
That too can be fixed ..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org sip:57141@fwd.pulver.com ENUM +87810-13313-31331 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683, Fax: +1 815.333.1237 <mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz> <http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
--On Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 19:57 +0000 Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:
Richard> ..maybe the carriers will go back to the ITU and get Richard> e164.int and we can end this issue once and for all.
Richard, independent of any other issues, e164.int would violate the narrow reading of "international organization" that ITU itself has been advocating for .INT. Whatever "e164" might be, it is not an international organization under that, or any sensible other, definition.
Hmm... How long do you think it would take ITU to set up processes and cost-recovery mechanisms for this? IIUC ITU has still not decided whether ENUM should be anchored in the public e164.arpa infrastructure or a new TLD owned and operated by ITU.
Assuming ITU could get such a new TLD, which raises a whole group of additional questions. To summarize them, don't hold your breath.
According to IANA, it's the IANA registry that manages .int, not the ITU. BTW the DNS infrastructure for .int is nowhere near the levels of robustness and global presence that .arpa has.
It is perhaps not an accident that .ARPA was chosen ;-/ john (one of the guilty parties)
At 03:33 PM 12/14/2004, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Tuesday, 14 December, 2004 19:57 +0000 Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:
Richard> ..maybe the carriers will go back to the ITU and get Richard> e164.int and we can end this issue once and for all.
Richard, independent of any other issues, e164.int would violate the narrow reading of "international organization" that ITU itself has been advocating for .INT. Whatever "e164" might be, it is not an international organization under that, or any sensible other, definition.
Fair enough John .. but you understand the basic problem here. The pressure to force the architecture of 3761 into doing things it was not generally intended to do is creating yet another barrier to adoption. At the request of the AD's I'm working on a draft right now that is trying to at least scope the problem and I'd be personally delighted if you'd take a look at it and add your thoughts and or comments. You certainly have a unique insight into the historical problem statement.
Hmm... How long do you think it would take ITU to set up processes and cost-recovery mechanisms for this? IIUC ITU has still not decided whether ENUM should be anchored in the public e164.arpa infrastructure or a new TLD owned and operated by ITU.
Assuming ITU could get such a new TLD, which raises a whole group of additional questions. To summarize them, don't hold your breath.
I wont I'm hoping to live a bit longer . :-) I'm just thrashing around looking for a solution that meets the carrier requirements but at the same time does not break SIP behavior or 3761.
According to IANA, it's the IANA registry that manages .int, not the ITU. BTW the DNS infrastructure for .int is nowhere near the levels of robustness and global presence that .arpa has.
It is perhaps not an accident that .ARPA was chosen ;-/
john (one of the guilty parties)
yes indeed ...present at the creation so to speak .. :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org sip:57141@fwd.pulver.com ENUM +87810-13313-31331 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683, Fax: +1 815.333.1237 <mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz> <http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
participants (3)
-
Jim Reid -
John C Klensin -
Richard Shockey