From enum-admin@ietf.org Mon Aug 13 00:03:04 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA23963 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 00:02:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA14397; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 23:53:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA14366 for ; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 23:53:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from yahoo.com (suneast-165-34-33-180.pompano.net [65.34.33.180] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA23834 for ; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 23:52:43 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <2620239-2200181134022234@yahoo.com> X-EM-Version: 6, 0, 0, 4 X-EM-Registration: #00F06206106618006920 X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: takemeupdown@yahoo.com From: "Cheap Magazines" To: enum@ietf.org Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 00:00:22 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Subject: [Enum] Deep Discount Magazine Subscriptions Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Magazine Subscriptions at the lowest prices anywhere!! http://www.magazinemaniac.com Automobile $5.95 Mademoiselle $7.95 Business 2.0 $6.95 Maxim $5.95 Car & Driver $6.95 Motor Trend $5.95 Cosmopolitan $11.95 New Yorker $18.95 Details $5.95 Outdoor Life $5.95 eCompany $5.95 PC Magazine $9.95 The Economist $48.75 PC World $9.95 Elle $7.95 Popular Science $6.95 Esquire $5.95 Reader's Diges $8.95 Fast Company $8.95 Road & Track $6.95 FHM $5.95 Rolling Stone $5.95 Field & Stream $5.95 Seventeen $5.95 Forbes $17.95 Spin $5.95 Fortune $15.95 Sports Afield $5.95 GQ $9.95 Stuff $5.95 Guns & Ammo $5.95 Teen $5.95 Inc. $5.95 Time $11.95 Jane $5.95 TV Guide $22.95 Kiplingers $7.95 Wired $8.95 And Hundreds of others at similarly cut-throat prices. You've never seen prices this low. You may never see them this low again. http://www.magazinemaniac.com reply with "remove" in subject line or body to be removed from this list. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Mon Aug 13 17:26:56 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA28996 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:26:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA20870; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:19:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA20836 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:19:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from chuckie.dgms.com (chuckie.dgms.com [38.150.156.4]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA28794 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:17:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ulticom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chuckie.dgms.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA20729 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:19:07 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3B7843E7.3DEE9D0@ulticom.com> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:17:27 -0400 From: Vijaya Venkatachalam Organization: Ulticom, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: enum@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------B91C2AF517F365A7141E58CC" Subject: [Enum] ENUM Service Providers Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------B91C2AF517F365A7141E58CC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I was wondering if there were any ENUM service providers out there? Thanks, Vijaya --------------B91C2AF517F365A7141E58CC Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vijaya.vcf" Content-Description: Card for Vijaya Venkatachalam Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vijaya.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit begin:vcard n:Venkatachalam;Vijaya tel;fax:+1-856-866-2033 tel;work:+1-856-787-2853 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:www.ulticom.com org:Ulticom, Inc.;Research & Development adr:;;1020 Briggs Rd;Mt. Laurel;NJ;08054;USA version:2.1 email;internet:vijaya@ulticom.com fn:Vijaya Venkatachalam end:vcard --------------B91C2AF517F365A7141E58CC-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 14 03:25:47 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA23661 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 03:25:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA11196; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 03:16:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA11165 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 03:16:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hvmta03-stg.us.psimail.psi.net (hvmta03-ext.us.psimail.psi.net [38.202.36.27]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA23574 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 03:15:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cjohn ([62.254.249.86]) by hvmta03-stg.us.psimail.psi.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with SMTP id <20010814071623.IHRP11304.hvmta03-stg.us.psimail.psi.net@cjohn>; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 03:16:23 -0400 From: "Chris John" To: "Vijaya Venkatachalam" , Subject: RE: [Enum] ENUM Service Providers Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 03:17:09 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <3B7843E7.3DEE9D0@ulticom.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Vijaya, NetNumber is a commercial ENUM Service Provider. We can be reached at www.netnumber.com . Sincerely, Chris John -----Original Message----- From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Vijaya Venkatachalam Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 5:17 PM To: enum@ietf.org Subject: [Enum] ENUM Service Providers Hi, I was wondering if there were any ENUM service providers out there? Thanks, Vijaya _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 14 08:18:49 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAB29143 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:18:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA17959; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:10:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA17928 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:10:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com [171.69.24.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA28554 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:09:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-av-3.cisco.com (sj-msg-av-3.cisco.com [171.69.2.19]) by sj-msg-core-2.cisco.com (8.11.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id f7EC9vT19346; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 05:09:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sj-msg-av-3.cisco.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7EC9eK19054; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 05:09:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CHSHARP-W2K1.cisco.com (rtp-vpn-37.cisco.com [10.82.192.37]) by mailman.cisco.com (8.9.3/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id FAA17452; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 05:09:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010814080255.00b91d08@dogwood.cisco.com> X-Sender: chsharp@dogwood.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:09:17 -0400 To: Vijaya Venkatachalam From: Chip Sharp Subject: Re: [Enum] ENUM Service Providers Cc: enum@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <3B7843E7.3DEE9D0@ulticom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org As far as I know, no companies are offering the ability to enter NAPTR RRs into DNS corresponding to a name derived from an E.164 number in the e164.arpa domain as defined in RFC2916. There are some organizations offering services based in part on procedures defined in RFC2916. However, they do not use the e164.arpa domain as defined in RFC2916. Chip At 05:17 PM 8/13/2001, Vijaya Venkatachalam wrote: >Hi, > >I was wondering if there were any ENUM service >providers out there? > >Thanks, >Vijaya _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 14 09:06:02 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA02367 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 09:06:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA19436; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:58:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA19408 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:58:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA01792 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:57:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [63.221.166.163] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id kwmnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:58:39 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010814081814.02b3faf8@exchange.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@exchange.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:58:11 -0400 To: Chip Sharp , Vijaya Venkatachalam From: "A.M.Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] ENUM Service Providers Cc: enum@ietf.org, In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010814080255.00b91d08@dogwood.cisco.com> References: <3B7843E7.3DEE9D0@ulticom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Hi Chip, >As far as I know, no companies are offering the ability to enter NAPTR RRs >into DNS corresponding to a name derived from an E.164 number in the >e164.arpa domain as defined in RFC2916. > >There are some organizations offering services based in part on procedures >defined in RFC2916. However, they do not use the e164.arpa domain as >defined in RFC2916. ENUM is a protocol for mapping telephone numbers - most popularly represented in DNS using the Rose-Malamud algorithm - to other identifiers or service capabilities associated with that number. RFC2916 is simply one rather controversial Proposed Standard for doing this. ENUM can and will be effected using multiple DNS RR types - CNAME, DNAME, A, NAPTR, and especially SVR, as well as supported by PTR RRs. You might want to reference ENUM working group discussions on this topic such as Lucent's Greg Vaudreuil, Microsoft's Christian Huitema, NetNumber's David Peek, or Telcordia's Hong Liu. See ENUM archives at http://www.ngi.org/enum/pub/Other_RRs.txt Indeed, with all the PAM related developments underway, SVR RRs seem the clear winner. They should also afford significantly greater potential end user privacy. It's worth noting that NetNumber was a major pioneer in the field, and the first to offer commercial ENUM services in the marketplace within the domain e164.com that should intrinsically dramatically outperform anything in e164.arpa Any general principle documents going forward to the ITU or any other intergovernmental body should emphasize as a *first principle*, not adversely affecting NetNumber and other commercial ENUM services in the marketplace. --tony _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 14 10:28:49 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA05793 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:28:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA22041; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:20:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA22010 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:20:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shell.nominum.com (shell.nominum.com [128.177.192.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA05619 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:19:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shell.nominum.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by shell.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E55483190D; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 07:20:14 -0700 (PDT) To: "A.M.Rutkowski" Cc: Chip Sharp , Vijaya Venkatachalam , enum@ietf.org, wcrews@cato.org Subject: Re: [Enum] ENUM Service Providers In-Reply-To: Message from "A.M.Rutkowski" of "Tue, 14 Aug 2001 08:58:11 EDT." <5.1.0.14.2.20010814081814.02b3faf8@exchange.netmagic.com> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 07:20:14 -0700 Message-ID: <82683.997798814@shell.nominum.com> From: Jim Reid Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org >>>>> "Tony" == A M Rutkowski writes: Tony> It's worth noting that NetNumber was a major pioneer in the Tony> field, and the first to offer commercial ENUM services in Tony> the marketplace within the domain e164.com that should Tony> intrinsically dramatically outperform anything in e164.arpa I'm very curious how one domain name "intrinsically dramatically outperforms" another. Please explain. Sure, a name server could be faster than another or appear to be faster because it's sited close to a good exchange point. But how does a name outperform another name? It's only a name after all. A cursory check with dig shows that there are two name servers for e164.com. These both appear to live on the same subnet. [After the Microsoft debacle a few months ago, I would have thought nobody made basic DNS administration mistakes like that any more.] Those two name servers give inconsistent answers for the zone's NS records. They also return referrals to non-existent hostnames like ns3.e164.com and ns4.e164.com. The two name servers for e164.com say they are running BIND 9.1.0. This contains bugs that have been fixed in the current BIND9 version, 9.1.3, which has long superseded it. By contrast there are currently three name servers for e164.arpa. These are in different locations on different nets and are operated by different organisations. They all answer consistently. So aside from this domain apparently being endorsed by the ITU and IAB -- the key movers and shakers in ENUM -- its DNS infrastructure appears to be in a much healthier state that e164.com. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 14 10:48:41 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA06320 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:48:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA22974; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:40:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA22946 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:40:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com [171.71.163.10]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA06078 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:39:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-av-3.cisco.com (sj-msg-av-3.cisco.com [171.69.2.19]) by sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (8.11.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id f7EEdrn27364; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 07:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sj-msg-av-3.cisco.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7EEdfF06634; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 07:39:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CHSHARP-W2K1.cisco.com (rtp-vpn-37.cisco.com [10.82.192.37]) by mailman.cisco.com (8.9.3/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id HAA11162; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 07:39:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010814101443.01ee9b00@dogwood.cisco.com> X-Sender: chsharp@dogwood.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:39:17 -0400 To: "A.M.Rutkowski" From: Chip Sharp Subject: Re: [Enum] ENUM Service Providers Cc: Vijaya Venkatachalam , enum@ietf.org, In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010814081814.02b3faf8@exchange.netmagic.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010814080255.00b91d08@dogwood.cisco.com> <3B7843E7.3DEE9D0@ulticom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Note that I didn't use the term "enum" or "ENUM" in my response. enum is the name of the working group in IETF that produced RFC2916. I'm not sure what "ENUM" means anymore. Chip At 08:58 AM 8/14/2001, A.M.Rutkowski wrote: >Hi Chip, > >>As far as I know, no companies are offering the ability to enter NAPTR >>RRs into DNS corresponding to a name derived from an E.164 number in the >>e164.arpa domain as defined in RFC2916. >> >>There are some organizations offering services based in part on >>procedures defined in RFC2916. However, they do not use the e164.arpa >>domain as defined in RFC2916. > >ENUM is a protocol for mapping telephone numbers - most >popularly represented in DNS using the Rose-Malamud algorithm - >to other identifiers or service capabilities associated with >that number. RFC2916 is simply one rather controversial Proposed >Standard for doing this. > >ENUM can and will be effected using multiple DNS RR types - >CNAME, DNAME, A, NAPTR, and especially SVR, as well as supported >by PTR RRs. You might want to reference ENUM working group >discussions on this topic such as Lucent's Greg Vaudreuil, >Microsoft's Christian Huitema, NetNumber's David Peek, or >Telcordia's Hong Liu. See ENUM archives at >http://www.ngi.org/enum/pub/Other_RRs.txt Indeed, with all >the PAM related developments underway, SVR RRs seem the >clear winner. They should also afford significantly greater >potential end user privacy. > >It's worth noting that NetNumber was a major pioneer in the >field, and the first to offer commercial ENUM services in the >marketplace within the domain e164.com that should intrinsically >dramatically outperform anything in e164.arpa > >Any general principle documents going forward to the ITU or >any other intergovernmental body should emphasize as a *first >principle*, not adversely affecting NetNumber and other >commercial ENUM services in the marketplace. > >--tony _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 14 12:32:02 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA09137 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:31:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA26932; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:24:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA26901 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:24:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA08839 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:23:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id bbnnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:24:38 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010814120539.02837a40@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:24:09 -0400 To: Jim Reid From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] ENUM Service Providers Cc: Chip Sharp , Vijaya Venkatachalam , enum@ietf.org, wcrews@cato.org In-Reply-To: <82683.997798814@shell.nominum.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010814081814.02b3faf8@exchange.netmagic.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_681399901==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_681399901==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hi Jim, >I'm very curious how one domain name "intrinsically dramatically >outperforms" another. Please explain. Sure, a name server could be >faster than another or appear to be faster because it's sited close to >a good exchange point. But how does a name outperform another name? >It's only a name after all. On one side, we have a commercial competitive global name resolution infrastructure operated and optimized by a provider who is free to chose sites, machines, architectures, resource records types, administrative schema, etc., to minimize latencies, optimize resolution, and enhance robustness. On the other side we have something that's a cross between the U.N. and the Soviet PTT sliced and diced on three different planes with nearly all the parties incented to kill it, and using a schema that few if any users will want. After someone tries to resolve a number and gets nothing for 9,999 out of 10,000 numbers; and that one takes 60 seconds to resolve to some ambiguous set of URLs, they'll catch on. >this domain apparently being endorsed by the ITU and IAB -- the key >movers and shakers in ENUM -- its DNS infrastructure appears to be in a >much healthier state that e164.com. IMHO, the key movers and shakers in ENUM are the customers. --tony --=====================_681399901==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Hi Jim,

I'm very curious how one domain name "intrinsically dramatically
outperforms" another. Please explain. Sure, a name server could be
faster than another or appear to be faster because it's sited close to
a good exchange point. But how does a name outperform another name?
It's only a name after all.

On one side, we have a commercial competitive global
name resolution infrastructure operated and optimized
by a provider who is free to chose sites, machines,
architectures, resource records types, administrative schema,
etc., to minimize latencies, optimize resolution, and
enhance robustness.

On the other side we have something that's a cross between
the U.N. and the Soviet PTT sliced and diced on three different
planes with nearly all the parties incented to kill it, and
using a schema that few if any users will want.

After someone tries to resolve a number and gets nothing
for 9,999 out of 10,000 numbers; and that one takes 60
seconds to resolve to some ambiguous set of URLs, they'll
catch on.

this domain apparently being endorsed by the ITU and IAB -- the key
movers and shakers in ENUM -- its DNS infrastructure appears to be in a
much healthier state that e164.com.

IMHO, the key movers and shakers in ENUM are the customers.

--tony --=====================_681399901==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 16 17:21:01 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23156 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:20:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA00618; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:11:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA00585 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:11:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com [171.71.163.10]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA22957 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:10:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-av-2.cisco.com (sj-msg-av-2.cisco.com [171.69.24.12]) by sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (8.11.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id f7GLBCn25018 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sj-msg-av-2.cisco.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7GLB0426040 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:11:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CHSHARP-W2K1.cisco.com (rtp-vpn-112.cisco.com [10.82.192.112]) by mailman.cisco.com (8.9.3/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id OAA19529 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:10:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010816170854.03f27568@dogwood.cisco.com> X-Sender: chsharp@dogwood.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:10:36 -0400 To: enum@ietf.org From: Chip Sharp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id RAA00586 Subject: [Enum] Fwd: First Meeting of the ENUM Forum Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit FYI, Chip >|January 17, 2001) at > 08/16/2001 04:41:38 PM > >ENUM Forum Participants, > >The first meeting of the ENUM Forum has been scheduled for Monday August 27 >starting at 1PM and ending at 5:00PM on Tuesday August 28. > >The meeting will be hosted by NeuStar at: >1120 Vermont Ave, NW >Suite 400 >Washington, DC > >If you plan on attending please send an email to Andy Gallant, >andrew.gallant@NEUSTAR.COM, so that our host can gauge the number of >participants. > >The draft agenda is as follows: > >- Approve Agenda >- Approve draft ENUM Forum Principles and Procedures >- Approve draft ENUM Forum Proposed Work Plan >- Nominations and Elections of Task Group Leaders >- Task Group Meetings >- Closing Plenary > >The latest versions of the documents are posted on the Enum Forum Web at: > >http://www.enumf.org/enumfpp.htm - under "Draft 8 Document ­ August 16, >2001 >" for the Principles and Procedures > >http://www.enumf.org/documents.html - under "Proposed ENUM Forum Work Plan >- >Rev 7 August 16, 2001" for the Workplan > >These documents may still be revised prior to the meeting, so make sure you >have the most recent versions for the meeting. > >Initially, five Task Groups have been formed within the ENUM Forum: > >1) Architecture and Infrastructure >2) Provisioning >3) ENUM Application >4) Security and Privacy >5) Interoperability > >As already reflected in the agenda, there will be nominations and elections >of the task group leaders at the August 27-28 meeting. To get a start on >the nomination process I would like to identfy those individuals who would >be interested in serving as Task Group Leaders. Therefore, I would like >people to either nominate someone or self nominate themselves for any of >the Task Group Leader positions. > >The nomination and election process would be as follows: > >-Send an email to both Steve Lind and myself; sdlind@att.com, >grichena@telcordia.com, indicating the name of the nominee (self >nominations are accepted) and the individual Task Group he/she would like >to lead by COB Wednesday August 22. It should be pointed out that, >nominations would not be closed and could still be made on the floor at the >meeting but it would give some indication to the membership as to >candidates for each Task Group. >- Steve or I will send out an email by COB Thursday August 23 indicating >who has been nominated for each of the Task Group Leadership positions. >- On Monday August 27, the nomination and election process would proceed. >It is understood that nominees must have the support of their companies. >- The elections will occur one Task Group at a time in the order 1-5 above >- Prior to the elections, the Chair will review the nominations and each >nominee would affirm their interest. In addition, any nominations from the >floor will be accepted provided they have the support of their company. >- The elections for the Task Group Leader will be held >- If an individual was in contention for a Task Group Leader position and >does not win, he/she is eligible for nomination for any of the other >remaining Task Group Leader Positions. For example, if a nominee lost the >election for the Architecture and Services Group, that individual could >then be nominated for the Provisioning Task Group Leader Position, and so >on until all the Task Group Leadership positions are filled. ...snip... _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 16 18:25:13 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA26597 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:25:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA03886; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:15:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA03861 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:15:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA26449 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:14:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA26587; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:15:41 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010816145627.0351f670@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:06:55 -0700 To: "A.M.Rutkowski" From: Dave Crocker Subject: Re: [Enum] ENUM Service Providers Cc: enum@ietf.org, In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010814081814.02b3faf8@exchange.netmagic.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010814080255.00b91d08@dogwood.cisco.com> <3B7843E7.3DEE9D0@ulticom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 09:58 PM 8/13/2001, A.M.Rutkowski wrote: >ENUM is a protocol for mapping telephone numbers - most >popularly represented in DNS using the Rose-Malamud algorithm - >to other identifiers or service capabilities associated with >that number. RFC2916 is simply one rather controversial Proposed >Standard for doing this. Oh? Please point to other standards for doing this, in particular ones that use the name "ENUM". (As already noted, one could have sworn that, in fact, ENUM was the name of an IETF working group...) And as we have discussed before, there is no controversy about the ENUM specification, except the controversy you keep trying to introduce. (Why Tony would think that this is some sort of Macbethian cauldron he can stir is mystifying.) >ENUM can and will be effected using multiple DNS RR types - >CNAME, DNAME, A, NAPTR, and especially SVR, as well as supported >by PTR RRs. You might want to reference ENUM working group >discussions on this topic such as Lucent's Greg Vaudreuil, >Microsoft's Christian Huitema, NetNumber's David Peek, or >Telcordia's Hong Liu. Yes, you might. You will then see that Tony is continuing to confuse technical debate with "controversy". He seems unaware that technical debate is a natural part of the process of developing technical specifications, with little implication of future failure, success or controversy. It is, in fact, downright impressive to see anyone trying to claim that the ENUM specification is controversial. >It's worth noting that NetNumber was a major pioneer in the >field, and the first to offer commercial ENUM services in the >marketplace within the domain e164.com that should intrinsically >dramatically outperform anything in e164.arpa I hope we are all duly impressed by this forceful, yet content-free, assertion. Note that no clarification has been forthcoming from Tony, in spite of a request that he explain what this nonsense is supposed to mean. As to the question of "competitive" telephone number lookup services, Tony is continuing to confuse "white pages" like services with "yellow pages" like services. By that I mean services that are formally tied to the assignee of a telephone number, versus those that have no such formal association. The e164.arpa ENUM effort is administratively interesting because it MUST ensure that the DNS-based use of a telephone number is ONLY associated with the registrant who is assigned that telephone number for telephony purposes. All those other "competitive" services that Tony likes to hype will offer no such assurances. Hence, the agency associated with a phone number in one of those other services well might be different that is associated with the the number used for telephony. d/ At 01:24 AM 8/14/2001, A.M. Rutkowski wrote: >>I'm very curious how one domain name "intrinsically dramatically >>outperforms" another. > >On one side, we have a commercial competitive global >name resolution infrastructure operated and optimized >... >On the other side we have something that's a cross between >the U.N. and the Soviet PTT sliced and diced on three different 1. Note that there is no technical content to Tony's statement other than "the commercial effort will optimize placement of servers". This is, of course, utter nonsense. 2. Tony fails to discuss the problems created by having competitive efforts for an inherently hierarchical service. Please see the RFC by the IAB or my own recent Internet-Draft that generalizes the IAB paper. >After someone tries to resolve a number and gets nothing >for 9,999 out of 10,000 numbers; and that one takes 60 >seconds to resolve to some ambiguous set of URLs, they'll >catch on. ambiguity will be caused by implementing Tony's scheme, and no other way. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 02:53:05 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA20526 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:53:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA22569; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:44:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA22538 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:44:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pds2.goodspeed.com (goodspeed4.coretel.net [162.33.160.188]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA20427 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:43:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [24.249.234.191] by pds2.410.ac (NTMail 6.00.0011/NY8829.00.3c5cf04d) with ESMTP id qqgaaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:41:50 -0400 Message-ID: <02c401c126e7$d82f6490$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> From: "John D. Goodspeed" To: Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:42:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services are a reality Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I should think that the last thing the world wants is an Orwellian "Authorized" monolithic structure owning or controlling Internet (enum) telephone numbers. As a paying telephone number subscriber, I effectively own my telephone number, therefore I shall choose to remain in control over how and when it is made available to the general public via the Internet. Only the best of competing private Internet telephone number (ENUM) publication services will ultimately prevail. Only private publication services can offer me, the consumer, ultimate control over my Internet telephone number. Innovative private sector services will be the first to market. From a practical point of view the consumer will decide what works and the consumer will decide based upon enum features and/or advertising mind share. The consumer is king. The monopoly is dead. From now on think "open systems" / "open numbers". Sincerely, John D. Goodspeed _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 03:57:18 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA21389 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:57:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA24127; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:49:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA24097 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:49:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mta.vizzavi.net ([62.213.128.222]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA21306 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:48:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from vizzavi.net ([10.24.27.46]) by mta.vizzavi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.4.0.2000.10.12.16.25.p8) with SMTP id <0GI700M6HCD3QW@mta.vizzavi.net> for enum@ietf.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:48:39 +0100 (BST) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:48:40 +0100 From: thomas Subject: RE: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services are a reality To: enum@ietf.org Message-id: <3b7ccc58.2b0b.16838@vizzavi.net> X-Mailer: WebIMAP to Mail Gateway v2.0j Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT John, This is a very narrow view of the world Telecoms market. The Paying Telephone number subscriber does not always own the number they are subscribed to. It is certainly not the case in the UK, where the operator owns the number. I can not see Operators wanting their numbers published in a non regulated ENUM publication service. Innovative private sector services might be the first to market but they are unlikely to be the ones used by operators owing to this lack of control and regulation. -----Original Message----- From: John D. Goodspeed [mailto:john@goodspeed.com] Sent: 17 August 2001 07:43 To: enum@ietf.org Subject: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services are a reality I should think that the last thing the world wants is an Orwellian "Authorized" monolithic structure owning or controlling Internet (enum) telephone numbers. As a paying telephone number subscriber, I effectively own my telephone number, therefore I shall choose to remain in control over how and when it is made available to the general public via the Internet. Only the best of competing private Internet telephone number (ENUM) publication services will ultimately prevail. Only private publication services can offer me, the consumer, ultimate control over my Internet telephone number. Innovative private sector services will be the first to market. From a practical point of view the consumer will decide what works and the consumer will decide based upon enum features and/or advertising mind share. The consumer is king. The monopoly is dead. From now on think "open systems" / "open numbers". Sincerely, John D. Goodspeed ------------------------------------------------ Click here for your free Vizzavi mail account http://www.vizzavi.co.uk ------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 06:30:26 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA22934 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:30:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id GAA27599; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:21:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id GAA27567 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:21:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bnmail.Westbrooke.bango.net ([62.254.208.129]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA22758 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:20:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from RAY3480CT.bango.net (RAY3480CT [192.168.0.106]) by bnmail.Westbrooke.bango.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id PHKTWGZ1; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:21:53 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817103817.00aa9c80@mail.bango.net> X-Sender: ray@mail.bango.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:15:09 +0100 To: "John D. Goodspeed" , From: Ray Anderson Subject: Re: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services In-Reply-To: <02c401c126e7$d82f6490$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org John, While I agree that a monolithic structure may be wrong, and that competition in services is great. (for example, Bango Numbers compete with some ENUM based companies), you underestimate the need to provide a stable infrastructure to enable innovation. Firstly, it is unclear whether a subscriber owns their number. In many countries, a government agency has the power to modify numbering plans. In the case of Europe, an EU directive could override national policy. In addition, if you move between countries, or between Mobile Operators, in some cases you cannot move your number "at will". Second, you, as cunsumer, do not normally have any power to say whether the number is made visible or not over the infrastructure. Generally, you only have control over the policies used when the number is called, and in many cases you can't even control that with certain types of number. You may also have some control over visibility in some directories. For example, companies or the state may be able to track you down, even if you are ex-directory Ray At 02:42 17/08/2001 -0400, John D. Goodspeed wrote: >I should think that the last thing the world wants is an Orwellian >"Authorized" monolithic structure owning or controlling Internet (enum) >telephone numbers. As a paying telephone number subscriber, I effectively >own my telephone number, therefore I shall choose to remain in control over >how and when it is made available to the general public via the Internet. > > >The consumer is king. The monopoly is dead. From now on think "open systems" >/ "open numbers". Ray Anderson CEO Bango.net Limited www.bango.net/00454545 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 06:56:51 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA23106 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:56:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id GAA28345; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:49:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id GAA28315 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:49:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA23039 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:47:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [63.221.166.182] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id rqonaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:49:27 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817063506.00b1d720@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:48:55 -0400 To: Ray Anderson , "John D. Goodspeed" , From: "A.M.Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817103817.00aa9c80@mail.bango.net> References: <02c401c126e7$d82f6490$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Hi Ray, John, >has the power to modify numbering plans. In the case of Europe, an EU >directive could override national >policy. As a general direction in empowering consumers in their retention and control of numbers you might want to reference the CEC Green Paper, Towards a European Numbering Environment, COM(96)590, Brussels, 20 Nov 1996. In addition, the European privacy policies in general are quite strong in providing protections to consumers as you note. The CEC IS DG appears to analyse ENUM developments in terms of anticompetitive actions by incumbent telcos within the Green Paper framework. Unfolding ENUM events provide them with lots of fodder for concern. In the U.S., the FCC's number portability policies have effectively made phone numbers the equivalent of pointers, albeit with an ambiguous user nexus. --tony _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 10:45:55 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA04036 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:45:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA03442; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:37:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA03410 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:37:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.51]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA03703 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:35:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from worldnet ([12.88.172.98]) by mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010817143625.VMBS18077.mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net@worldnet>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:36:25 +0000 From: "Judith Oppenheimer" To: "'Ray Anderson'" , "'John D. Goodspeed'" , Subject: RE: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:14:38 -0400 Message-ID: <001e01c12729$cbe4dac0$62ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817103817.00aa9c80@mail.bango.net> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In the U.S. subscribers of all wireline numbers, both portable and not, have a choice to be listed or unlisted. Subscribers of toll free numbers are granted privacy by tariff: RespOrgs are proscribed from revealing who the subscriber of a toll free number is. Subscribers are granted "control over the tollfree number and service", not "ownership," though some are obviously treated as assets (1 800 FLOWERS, etc.) However, telephone companies and RespOrgs do not own telephone numbers either. Numbers are considered a resource of the North American Numbering Plan. Judith --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Judith Oppenheimer http://JudithOppenheimer.com 212 684-7210, 1 800 The Expert Publisher, http://ICBTollFreeNews.com "An important source of inside information," says InfoWorld; "superb", "invaluable", "critically intelligent", "exceedingly useful", report ICB Premium Subscribers. ENTER HERE: http://www.roibot.com/w.cgi?R1764_sig --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Ray > Anderson > Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 6:15 AM > To: John D. Goodspeed; enum@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services > > > John, > > While I agree that a monolithic structure may be wrong, and that > competition in services is great. > (for example, Bango Numbers compete with some ENUM based > companies), you > underestimate the > need to provide a stable infrastructure to enable innovation. > > Firstly, it is unclear whether a subscriber owns their > number. In many > countries, a government agency > has the power to modify numbering plans. In the case of > Europe, an EU > directive could override national > policy. In addition, if you move between countries, or > between Mobile > Operators, in some cases you cannot move > your number "at will". > > Second, you, as cunsumer, do not normally have any power to > say whether the > number is made visible or > not over the infrastructure. Generally, you only have > control over the > policies used when the number is called, and > in many cases you can't even control that with certain types of > number. You may also have some control over visibility > in some directories. For example, companies or the state may > be able to > track you down, even if you are ex-directory > > Ray > > At 02:42 17/08/2001 -0400, John D. Goodspeed wrote: > >I should think that the last thing the world wants is an Orwellian > >"Authorized" monolithic structure owning or controlling > Internet (enum) > >telephone numbers. As a paying telephone number subscriber, > I effectively > >own my telephone number, therefore I shall choose to remain > in control over > >how and when it is made available to the general public via > the Internet. > > > > > >The consumer is king. The monopoly is dead. From now on > think "open systems" > >/ "open numbers". > > > Ray Anderson CEO Bango.net Limited > www.bango.net/00454545 > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 11:13:29 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA04750 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:13:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA04723; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:05:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA04692 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:05:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (oe-mp2pub.managedmail.com [206.46.164.23]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA04501 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:04:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net ([206.46.164.27]) by oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with ESMTP id <20010817150416.KDVG2458.oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net@oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net> for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:04:16 -0500 Received: from c475306m ([206.35.147.89]) by oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with SMTP id <20010817150352.ZNZL26151.oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net@c475306m> for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:03:52 -0500 From: "Fred Radford" To: Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:04:49 -0700 Message-ID: <005201c1272d$f719cf80$8640100a@c475306m> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Enum] FW: Mailman results for enum Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit UNSUBSCRIBE ME NOW!!! -- Fred Radford Fred.Radford@openwave.com TAC Senior STA Manager 650.480.7314 office Openwave Systems Inc. 650.274.1540 mobile ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Privacy and Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this electronic mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not an intended recipient, you must not copy, forward, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please notify the sender immediately. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----Original Message----- From: enum-request@ietf.org [mailto:enum-request@ietf.org] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:03 AM To: fred.radford@openwave.com Subject: Mailman results for enum This is an automated response. There were problems with the email commands you sent to Mailman via the administrative address . To obtain instructions on valid Mailman email commands, send email to with the word "help" in the subject line or in the body of the message. If you want to reach the human being that manages this mailing list, please send your message to . The following is a detailed description of the problems. ***** unsubscribe >>>>> Usage: unsubscribe [] ***** End: -- The rest of the message is ignored: > Fred Radford Fred.Radford@openwave.com > TAC Senior STA Manager 650.480.7314 office > Openwave Systems Inc. 650.274.1540 mobile > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Privacy and Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this > electronic mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. > It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not > an intended recipient, you must not copy, forward, distribute or take > any action in reliance on it. If you have received this electronic mail > message in error, please notify the sender immediately. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 11:14:25 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA04773 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:14:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA04778; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:05:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA04749 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:05:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (oe-mp2pub.managedmail.com [206.46.164.23]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA04518 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:04:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net ([206.46.164.27]) by oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with ESMTP id <20010817150443.KEDJ2458.oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net@oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net> for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:04:43 -0500 Received: from c475306m ([206.35.147.89]) by oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with SMTP id <20010817150418.ZNZZ26151.oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net@c475306m> for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:04:18 -0500 From: "Fred Radford" To: Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:05:17 -0700 Message-ID: <005301c1272e$06b2bb00$8640100a@c475306m> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Enum] FW: Mailman results for enum Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit OR YOU WILL GET THESE, AGAIN AND AGAIN !!! -- Fred Radford Fred.Radford@openwave.com TAC Senior STA Manager 650.480.7314 office Openwave Systems Inc. 650.274.1540 mobile ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Privacy and Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this electronic mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not an intended recipient, you must not copy, forward, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please notify the sender immediately. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----Original Message----- From: enum-request@ietf.org [mailto:enum-request@ietf.org] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:03 AM To: fred.radford@openwave.com Subject: Mailman results for enum This is an automated response. There were problems with the email commands you sent to Mailman via the administrative address . To obtain instructions on valid Mailman email commands, send email to with the word "help" in the subject line or in the body of the message. If you want to reach the human being that manages this mailing list, please send your message to . The following is a detailed description of the problems. ***** unsubscribe >>>>> Usage: unsubscribe [] ***** End: -- The rest of the message is ignored: > Fred Radford Fred.Radford@openwave.com > TAC Senior STA Manager 650.480.7314 office > Openwave Systems Inc. 650.274.1540 mobile > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Privacy and Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this > electronic mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. > It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not > an intended recipient, you must not copy, forward, distribute or take > any action in reliance on it. If you have received this electronic mail > message in error, please notify the sender immediately. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 11:14:32 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA04786 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:14:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA04842; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:06:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA04804 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:06:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (oe-mp2pub.managedmail.com [206.46.164.23]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA04539 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:04:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net ([206.46.164.27]) by oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with ESMTP id <20010817150456.KEFP2458.oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net@oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net> for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:04:56 -0500 Received: from c475306m ([206.35.147.89]) by oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with SMTP id <20010817150432.ZOAD26151.oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net@c475306m> for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:04:32 -0500 From: "Fred Radford" To: Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:05:31 -0700 Message-ID: <005401c1272e$0ec93210$8640100a@c475306m> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Enum] FW: Mailman results for enum Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit THERE IS NO PASSWORD!!! -- Fred Radford Fred.Radford@openwave.com TAC Senior STA Manager 650.480.7314 office Openwave Systems Inc. 650.274.1540 mobile ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Privacy and Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this electronic mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not an intended recipient, you must not copy, forward, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please notify the sender immediately. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----Original Message----- From: enum-request@ietf.org [mailto:enum-request@ietf.org] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:03 AM To: fred.radford@openwave.com Subject: Mailman results for enum This is an automated response. There were problems with the email commands you sent to Mailman via the administrative address . To obtain instructions on valid Mailman email commands, send email to with the word "help" in the subject line or in the body of the message. If you want to reach the human being that manages this mailing list, please send your message to . The following is a detailed description of the problems. ***** unsubscribe >>>>> Usage: unsubscribe [] ***** End: -- The rest of the message is ignored: > Fred Radford Fred.Radford@openwave.com > TAC Senior STA Manager 650.480.7314 office > Openwave Systems Inc. 650.274.1540 mobile > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Privacy and Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this > electronic mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. > It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not > an intended recipient, you must not copy, forward, distribute or take > any action in reliance on it. If you have received this electronic mail > message in error, please notify the sender immediately. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 11:29:36 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05288 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:29:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA05661; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:21:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA05632 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:21:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA04969 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:20:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA24541; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:21:44 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817081956.029c0d48@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:22:11 -0700 To: "John D. Goodspeed" From: Dave Crocker Subject: Re: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services are a reality Cc: In-Reply-To: <02c401c126e7$d82f6490$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 11:42 PM 8/16/2001, John D. Goodspeed wrote: >I should think that the last thing the world wants is an Orwellian >"Authorized" monolithic structure owning or controlling Internet (enum) >telephone numbers Sorry to see you take Tony's specious and silly bait. To consider the question of "competitive" ENUM service, please provide us with some history about similar, competitive services, such as for street names/numbers, drivers license numbers, and the like. No doubt you also are looking forward to "competitive" IP addresses? sigh. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 11:43:53 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05669 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:43:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA06665; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:36:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA06632 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:36:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nic-naa.net (216-220-241-232.midmaine.com [216.220.241.232]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05442 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:34:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nic-naa.net (localhost.nic-naa.net [127.0.0.1]) by nic-naa.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f7HFXBO85219; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:33:11 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from brunner@nic-naa.net) Message-Id: <200108171533.f7HFXBO85219@nic-naa.net> To: "John D. Goodspeed" cc: enum@ietf.org, brunner@nic-naa.net Subject: Re: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services are a reality In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:42:54 EDT." <02c401c126e7$d82f6490$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:33:11 -0400 From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org John, > I should think that the last thing the world wants is a ... Could you provide me a pointer to the requirements you are thinking of? > ... monolithic structure [allocating] Internet [resources] ... Counter-examples? Mechanism is good. Desire without mechanism is ... like legislation forbidding snowfall ... slightly problematic. Details please. Eric _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 11:51:41 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06025 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:51:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA06935; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:42:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA06906 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:42:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nic-naa.net (216-220-241-232.midmaine.com [216.220.241.232]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05593 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:41:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nic-naa.net (localhost.nic-naa.net [127.0.0.1]) by nic-naa.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f7HFe1O85397; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:40:01 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from brunner@nic-naa.net) Message-Id: <200108171540.f7HFe1O85397@nic-naa.net> To: andrew.gallant@NEUSTAR.COM cc: enum@ietf.org, brunner@nic-naa.net Subject: Re: [Enum] Fwd: First Meeting of the ENUM Forum Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:40:01 -0400 From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Andy, Feel free to draft me as needed, for anything dns related, and I could head the privacy (data collection) portion of item #4) S & P. Eric _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 11:59:13 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06326 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:59:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA07396; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:50:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA07316 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:50:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (oe-mp2pub.managedmail.com [206.46.164.23]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05960 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:49:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net ([206.46.164.27]) by oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with ESMTP id <20010817154945.LKYP2458.oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net@oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:49:45 -0500 Received: from c475306m ([206.35.147.89]) by oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with SMTP id <20010817154910.ZPSX26151.oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net@c475306m>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:49:10 -0500 From: "Fred Radford" To: "'Jordyn A. Buchanan'" Cc: Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: Mailman results for enum Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:49:26 -0700 Message-ID: <006301c12734$3fe269b0$8640100a@c475306m> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have sent many emails to the admin, with not a SINGLE RESPONSE! -- Fred Radford Fred.Radford@openwave.com TAC Senior STA Manager 650.480.7314 office Openwave Systems Inc. 650.274.1540 mobile ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Privacy and Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this electronic mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not an intended recipient, you must not copy, forward, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this electronic mail message in error, please notify the sender immediately. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----Original Message----- From: Jordyn A. Buchanan [mailto:jordyn@register.com] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:36 AM To: Fred Radford Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: Mailman results for enum Fred: You are sending these obnoxious messages to dozens or hundreds of people in your attempt to get the attention of the list administrator. One polite note requesting the attention of the list admin would probably be sufficient to solve your problem. Your current behavior is juvenile and reflects poorly on both you and your employer. Jordyn >OR YOU WILL GET THESE, AGAIN AND AGAIN !!! > >-- >Fred Radford Fred.Radford@openwave.com >TAC Senior STA Manager 650.480.7314 office >Openwave Systems Inc. 650.274.1540 mobile >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Privacy and Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this >electronic mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. >It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not >an intended recipient, you must not copy, forward, distribute or take >any action in reliance on it. If you have received this electronic mail >message in error, please notify the sender immediately. >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: enum-request@ietf.org [mailto:enum-request@ietf.org] >Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 8:03 AM >To: fred.radford@openwave.com >Subject: Mailman results for enum > > >This is an automated response. > >There were problems with the email commands you sent to Mailman via >the administrative address . > >To obtain instructions on valid Mailman email commands, send email to > with the word "help" in the subject line or in >the body of the message. > >If you want to reach the human being that manages this mailing list, >please send your message to . > >The following is a detailed description of the problems. > > >***** unsubscribe >>>>>> Usage: unsubscribe [] > >***** End: -- >The rest of the message is ignored: >> Fred Radford Fred.Radford@openwave.com >> TAC Senior STA Manager 650.480.7314 office >> Openwave Systems Inc. 650.274.1540 mobile >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Privacy and Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this >> electronic mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. >> It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not >> an intended recipient, you must not copy, forward, distribute or take >> any action in reliance on it. If you have received this electronic mail >> message in error, please notify the sender immediately. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> >> > > > > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 16:06:06 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14350 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:06:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA15388; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:57:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA15357 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:57:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bnmail.Westbrooke.bango.net ([62.254.208.129]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA14186 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:56:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from RAY3480CT.bango.net (host213-120-116-62.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.120.116.62]) by bnmail.Westbrooke.bango.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id PHKTWHDT; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:58:28 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817205507.00ac82b0@mail.bango.net> X-Sender: ray@mail.bango.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:58:12 +0100 To: "Judith Oppenheimer" , "'John D. Goodspeed'" , From: Ray Anderson Subject: RE: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services In-Reply-To: <001e01c12729$cbe4dac0$62ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817103817.00aa9c80@mail.bango.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 10:14 17/08/2001 -0400, Judith Oppenheimer wrote: >In the U.S. subscribers of all wireline numbers, both portable and not, >have a choice to be listed or unlisted. I think it is correct that there is nothing to stop somebody publishing a wireline number, not owned by them, in a directory, even it the operator managing the number has been told not to put it in their directory. In the UK, there are several businesses collecting and publishing "ex-directory" numbers, for example Tony Blair's, etc. Also, whether a number is listed or not, the number is still accessible, simply by anybody dialling in. > > > > Second, you, as cunsumer, do not normally have any power to > > say whether the > > number is made visible or > > not over the infrastructure. > > > Ray > > >Ray Anderson CEO Bango.net Limited www.bango.net/00454545 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 16:22:44 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14619 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:22:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA16249; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:15:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA16218 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:15:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.46]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14502 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:13:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from worldnet ([12.88.171.107]) by mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010817201437.SPHK12706.mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net@worldnet>; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 20:14:37 +0000 From: "Judith Oppenheimer" To: "'Ray Anderson'" , "'John D. Goodspeed'" , Subject: RE: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:13:02 -0400 Message-ID: <005001c12759$0a14ea40$62ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817205507.00ac82b0@mail.bango.net> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I think it is correct that there is nothing to stop somebody > publishing a > wireline number, > not owned by them, in a directory, even it the operator > managing the number > has been told not > to put it in their directory. Where would they get the information, if not from the carrier or the customer? > Also, whether a number is listed or not, the number is still > accessible, > simply by anybody > dialling in. Not all numbers can be dialed by everyone. For example, caller ID-blocked numbers can be rejected by called party, both on calling and on *69. Toll free numbers are often area code blocked, so only callers from the customer's chosen areas can get through. In addition, the ring-to recipient on a toll free number is often not the subscriber. Judith > -----Original Message----- > From: Ray Anderson [mailto:ray@bango.net] > Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:58 PM > To: Judith Oppenheimer; 'John D. Goodspeed'; enum@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services > > > At 10:14 17/08/2001 -0400, Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > >In the U.S. subscribers of all wireline numbers, both > portable and not, > >have a choice to be listed or unlisted. > > I think it is correct that there is nothing to stop somebody > publishing a > wireline number, > not owned by them, in a directory, even it the operator > managing the number > has been told not > to put it in their directory. > > In the UK, there are several businesses collecting and publishing > "ex-directory" numbers, > for example Tony Blair's, etc. > > Also, whether a number is listed or not, the number is still > accessible, > simply by anybody > dialling in. > > > > > > > Second, you, as cunsumer, do not normally have any power to > > > say whether the > > > number is made visible or > > > not over the infrastructure. > > > > Ray > > > > >Ray Anderson CEO Bango.net Limited > > www.bango.net/00454545 > _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 17:03:16 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15246 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:03:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA17195; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:55:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA17164 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:55:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bnmail.Westbrooke.bango.net ([62.254.208.129]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15109 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:54:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from RAY3480CT.bango.net (host213-120-116-62.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.120.116.62]) by bnmail.Westbrooke.bango.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id PHKTWH1K; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:56:09 +0100 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817214853.030b7be8@mail.bango.net> X-Sender: ray@mail.bango.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 21:55:53 +0100 To: From: Ray Anderson Subject: RE: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services In-Reply-To: <005001c12759$0a14ea40$62ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817205507.00ac82b0@mail.bango.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Judith, At 16:13 17/08/2001 -0400, Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > > I think it is correct that there is nothing to stop somebody > > publishing a wireline number, not owned by them, in a directory, even > it the operator > > managing the number has been told not to put it in their directory. > >Where would they get the information, if not from the carrier or the >customer? Phone companies in the UK, and other agencies, appear to have access to information that is not made public. For example, Vodafone Directory Enquiries appears to have the name, number and address of British Telecom ex-directory subscribers. Similarly, if you pretend to be a Doctor trying to reach a relative of a dying person, the Operator staff can be bullied into revealing the number. There are numerous other scams to get the info, especially since most people do not withhold caller ID, even if they knew they could! > > Also, whether a number is listed or not, the number is still > > accessible, > > simply by anybody > > dialling in. > >Not all numbers can be dialed by everyone. For example, caller ID-blocked >numbers can be rejected by called party, both on calling and on *69. Toll >free numbers are often area code blocked, so only callers from the >customer's chosen areas can get through. In addition, the ring-to >recipient on a toll free number is often not the subscriber. Sorry, you are right. What I meant to say was that people can still try to dial a number and its up to the customer / supplier to determine behaviour. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 17:47:02 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15708 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:47:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA18450; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:38:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA18423 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:38:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com [171.70.157.152]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA15583 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:37:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-av-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-av-1.cisco.com [171.69.11.130]) by sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (8.11.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id f7HLaND05116 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:36:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sj-msg-av-1.cisco.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7HLcQQ27815 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:38:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CHSHARP-W2K1.cisco.com (rtp-vpn-62.cisco.com [10.82.192.62]) by mailman.cisco.com (8.9.3/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id OAA01940 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:38:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010817170826.01e10d78@dogwood.cisco.com> X-Sender: chsharp@dogwood.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:18:26 -0400 To: enum@ietf.org From: Chip Sharp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Enum] Proposed contribution to ITU SG2 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org FWIW, Below is a URL to a contribution I am planning to submit to ITU SG2 meeting in September concerning criteria & procedures for registering Country Code domains in e164.arpa. http://people.itu.int/~hsharp/enum/draft_enum_proc_02.zip I'm in the middle of re-formatting it to submit as an I-D. Chip _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 17 18:46:20 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA16544 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:46:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA19780; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:38:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA19751 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:38:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA16358 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:37:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA05677 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:38:23 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817153230.0298ef68@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:34:42 -0700 To: From: Dave Crocker Subject: RE: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817214853.030b7be8@mail.bango.net> References: <005001c12759$0a14ea40$62ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010817205507.00ac82b0@mail.bango.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Folks, This is an IETF mailing list. It is for technical discussions for the purpose of specifying standards. This thread is entirely irrelevant to such an activity. Please move it elsewhere. d/ ps. And for those who understand and respect this matter of appropriate scope and venue, it is important not to respond to further messages in this thread. ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Sat Aug 18 20:36:24 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16836 for ; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 20:36:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA27897; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 20:27:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA27866 for ; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 20:27:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (oe-mp2pub.managedmail.com [206.46.164.23]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA16735 for ; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 20:26:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net ([206.46.164.27]) by oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with ESMTP id <20010819002627.NXZU2458.oe-mp2.bizmailsrvcs.net@oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 19:26:27 -0500 Received: from c475306m ([24.250.149.189]) by oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-101-20001108) with SMTP id <20010819002604.UXX26151.oe-ismta2.bizmailsrvcs.net@c475306m>; Sat, 18 Aug 2001 19:26:04 -0500 From: "Fred Radford" To: "'Jim Reid'" Cc: Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: Mailman results for enum Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 17:27:03 -0700 Message-ID: <00bc01c12845$ac3a4940$8640100a@c475306m> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <33874.998066886@shell.nominum.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit No, TAKE ME OFF THIS LIST, or fix the crappy software so that I can remove myself! -----Original Message----- From: Jim Reid [mailto:Jim.Reid@nominum.com] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 9:48 AM To: Fred Radford Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: Mailman results for enum STOP SENDING THIS CRAP TO THE MAILING LIST! _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Sun Aug 19 08:23:07 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA11418 for ; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 08:23:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA19530; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 08:14:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA19499 for ; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 08:13:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA11290 for ; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 08:12:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [66.44.57.209] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id kcpnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 08:14:08 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010819080755.00b1daf8@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 08:12:21 -0400 To: "Judith Oppenheimer" , "'Ray Anderson'" , "'John D. Goodspeed'" , From: "A.M.Rutkowski" Subject: RE: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services In-Reply-To: <005001c12759$0a14ea40$62ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817205507.00ac82b0@mail.bango.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Hi Judith, >Where would they get the information, if not from the carrier or the >customer? Basically SS7 based databases such as LIDB. Integrating ENUM implementations into the world of telephony signalling except for discussion about LNP, rather got left out of much of the ENUM dialogue. It is very relevant to the subject. --tony _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Mon Aug 20 00:25:58 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA21175 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:25:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA05822; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:14:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA05793 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:14:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA20899 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 00:13:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA26147; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 21:14:22 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010819211217.036153b8@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 21:13:54 -0700 To: "A.M.Rutkowski" From: Dave Crocker Subject: RE: [Enum] Competitive ENUM services Cc: "Judith Oppenheimer" , "'Ray Anderson'" , "'John D. Goodspeed'" , In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010819080755.00b1daf8@mail.netmagic.com> References: <005001c12759$0a14ea40$62ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010817205507.00ac82b0@mail.bango.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 05:12 AM 8/19/2001, A.M.Rutkowski wrote: >Hi Judith, > >>Where would they get the information, if not from the carrier or the >>customer? > >Basically SS7 based databases such as LIDB. "SS7 based databases" are maintained by carriers. >Integrating >ENUM implementations into the world of telephony signalling >except for discussion about LNP, rather got left out of >much of the ENUM dialogue. It is very relevant to the >subject. In what way, Tony? How does it relate to the charter of the ENUM working group? d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Mon Aug 20 03:30:51 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA08912 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:30:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA18893; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:21:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA18862 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:21:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA08833 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:20:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.10] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA10336; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 09:20:39 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 09:19:36 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Dave Crocker , enum@ietf.org Message-ID: <1230887.998299176@localhost> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010817153230.0298ef68@dcrocker.net> References: <005001c12759$0a14ea40$62ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010817205507.00ac82b0@mail.bango.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010817153230.0298ef68@dcrocker.net> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id DAA18863 Subject: [Enum] Message from Working Group Chair Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Thanks Dave for pointing this out. Due to bad food on the flight back from the IETF in London, I have been completely offline the last week, and will slowly recover the coming 2-3 weeks. As Dave points out, this mailing list is for the ENUM working group in the IETF. I have seen on messages that the mailman stuff at ietf.org seems to not be working, and I will talk with the administrator about this. The charter of the wg is defined as seen on the IETF website, and anything outside what is specified on that charter is out of scope, and not suitable for discussion on this mailing list. Regarding competition, I urge people which argue for competition using a naming mechanism which is not based on the unique naming in DNS (i.e. more than one root in the DNS tree is used) and this draft MUST contain issues like: - Specific algorithms used for party which want to store things in DNS (the party which want to be called) - Specific algorithms used for party which want to lookup things in DNS (the party which makes the call) Notice that I explicitly say that DNS is used, DNS which does not have searches. And, given that DNS is used, RFC 2826 MUST be referenced and all questions and concernes in RFC 2826 MUST be clearly addressed. When you have published that I-D as an individual submission, let the working group chairs know, and we will make a decision whether the document is to be part of the working group charter. Having arguments and discussions without documents turn the discussions into pie throwing exercises. Until such document exists, I will as wg chair decide that RFC 2916 is what this WG is referencing, and RFC 2916 talks about one root in the DNS hierarchy. Because of this, this mailing list is NOT for discussion on "alternate roots" before documents exists which explain in great detail how that is to work technically given requirements in RFC 2826. I also urge people which DO belive in RFC 2916 to also write documents which talk about how "competition" is handled (choice for the holder of the E.164 number to get good service etc), and proceed like I describe above. Regards, Patrik --On 08/17/2001 3:34 PM -0700 Dave Crocker wrote: > > > Folks, > > This is an IETF mailing list. It is for technical discussions for the > purpose of specifying standards. > > This thread is entirely irrelevant to such an activity. > > Please move it elsewhere. > > d/ > > ps. And for those who understand and respect this matter of appropriate > scope and venue, it is important not to respond to further messages in > this thread. > > ---------- > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > Patrik Fältström Cisco Systems Consulting Engineer Office of the CSO Phone: (Stockholm) +46-8-6859131 (San Jose) +1-408-525-8509 PGP: 2DFC AAF6 16F0 F276 7843 2DC1 BC79 51D9 7D25 B8DC _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Mon Aug 20 14:44:58 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA29813 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:44:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA07134; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:28:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA07102 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:28:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heron.verisign.com (heron.verisign.com [216.168.233.95]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA29385 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:27:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from VSVAPOSTALGW1.prod.netsol.com (vsvapostalgw1.prod.netsol.com [216.168.234.201]) by heron.verisign.com (nsi_0.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA05423 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:28:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by VSVAPOSTALGW1.prod.netsol.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:27:48 -0400 Message-ID: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84C2@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com> From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" To: enum@ietf.org Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:22:14 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org In the spirit of the note Patrik sent earlier today, I've written the individual submission I-D described below. It's intended to be a "stake in the ground" for discussion using example data derived from RFC 2916. -----Original Message----- From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts@ietf.org] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 7:07 AM To: IETF-Announce; @loki.ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Extensible Provisioning Protocol E.164 Number Mapping Author(s) : S. Hollenbeck Filename : draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Pages : 39 Date : 17-Aug-01 This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) mapping for the provisioning and management of E.164 numbers stored in a shared central repository. Specified in XML, the mapping defines EPP command syntax and semantics as applied to E.164 numbers. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Mon Aug 20 15:03:46 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA00196 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:03:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA07698; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:48:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA07669 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:48:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA29849 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:47:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id OAA18804 for enum@ietf.org; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:44:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:44:26 -0400 From: Michael Mealling To: enum@ietf.org Message-ID: <20010820144426.S17352@bailey.dscga.com> Reply-To: Michael Mealling Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i Subject: [Enum] a bug in RFC 2915 (fixed in draft-ietf-urn-ddds-04.txt) Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Hi all, James Yu has discovered a bug in the algorithm specification in RFC 2915 that may bite many ENUM implementations. Section 4, paragraph 4 says this: The first match MUST be the match that is used. Once a match is found, the Services field is examined for whether or not this rule advances toward the desired result. If so, the rule is applied to the target string. If not, the process halts. The domain that results from the regular expression is then used as the domain of the next loop through the NAPTR algorithm. Note that the same target string is used throughout the algorithm. The sentence "If not, the process halts." is incorrect since this would mean you can never see alternative records that may match but have different Services fields. The sentence should read like this: "If not, then continue with the next record in the existing list of records and do the match/Service field examiniation step again." This has been fixed for a while in draft-ietf-urn-ddds-04.txt. I hope that we can see the DDDS documents out as RFCs soon... Thanks to James for catching this one! -MM -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Mealling | Vote Libertarian! | urn:pin:1 michael@neonym.net | | http://www.neonym.net _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Mon Aug 20 20:07:45 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA07962 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 20:07:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA22532; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:57:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA22466 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:57:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from permissiononly.com (permissiononly.com [216.133.253.90]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA07740 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 19:56:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailman@localhost) by permissiononly.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA22683; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:17:47 -0700 Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:17:47 -0700 Message-Id: <200108202317.QAA22683@permissiononly.com> Content-type: text/html From: James.Zacha@permissiononly.com To: enum@ietf.org Subject: [Enum] Add Streaming Media to your Web Site Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org VitalStream
 
Now Showing
Free Streaming Kit
You Can Add Streaming Media to
<www.domain.com>

Streaming Media is Easier Than You Think

I invite you to learn more about streaming media by reading our Free Streaming Kit on Live Streaming with Windows Media. It contains a step-by-step tutorial on how to stream media over the Internet with Windows Media technologies.

VitalStream specializes in customized streaming and hosting solutions for small to medium sized businesses.

VitalStream Delivers...

- Live and On-Demand Streaming
- Pay-Per-View Solutions
- 24 x 7 Live Technical Support
- 99.7% Guaranteed Uptime
- And More...

These companies use us
for their streaming needs.

Call today to see what
VitalStream can do for
<www.domain.com>

 Windows Media Service Provider

jzacha@vitalstream.cc
Account Representative
(888) 999-4932 x2028
James Zacha

VitalStream
 


Click here if you received this message in error.

Microsoft, Windows Media, and the Windows Logo are trademarks or registered
trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.

_______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 21 07:27:03 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA05158 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:27:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA17715; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:10:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA17684 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:10:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rafi ([213.8.76.34]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA04250 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 07:08:57 -0400 (EDT) From: sales@seebex.com Received: from mail pickup service by rafi with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:10:18 +0200 To: Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:10:17 +0200 Message-ID: <106801c12a3a$3e0306a0$0200a8c0@rafi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000 Thread-Index: AcEqOj4DCR/QdcebT+Ok9M2wtJTBdA== Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Aug 2001 12:10:18.0424 (UTC) FILETIME=[3E44A380:01C12A3A] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id HAA17685 Subject: [Enum] Instant Messaging platform at your Web site is now a few clicks away Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Instant Messaging platform at your Web site is now a few clicks away ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Install a FREE Instant Messaging server at your Web site. Use it as is or customize to meet your specific branding. Cross platform servers line support 25 and up to 1000 concurrent users All servers offered can be secured with RSA 512Bit (and higher) encryption!! Download free 10 concurrent users server at: http://www.seebex.com/download/get_server.asp It is easier, faster and affordable than ever!! For further information please check seebex Web site at: http://www.seebex.com or contact our Marketing & Sales department at sales@seebex.com First 50 Web sites to download and embed the free 10 concurrent users server are entitled to a free 100 concurrent users server and will be listed on Seebex Web site. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 21 11:22:55 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA20057 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:22:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA26984; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:08:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA26953 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:08:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA19203 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:06:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id KAA00963; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:08:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: from unknown(192.168.20.227) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xmac00940; Tue, 21 Aug 01 10:07:51 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010821103953.02d12750@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:49:40 -0400 To: enum@ietf.org From: Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [Enum] a bug in RFC 2915 (fixed in draft-ietf-urn-ddds-04.txt) Cc: michaelm@neonym.net In-Reply-To: <20010820144426.S17352@bailey.dscga.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 02:44 PM 8/20/2001 -0400, Michael Mealling wrote: >Hi all, > James Yu has discovered a bug in the algorithm specification in RFC 2915 >that may bite many ENUM implementations. Section 4, paragraph 4 says this: > > The first match MUST be the match that is used. Once a match is > found, the Services field is examined for whether or not this rule > advances toward the desired result. If so, the rule is applied to > the target string. If not, the process halts. The domain that > results from the regular expression is then used as the domain of the > next loop through the NAPTR algorithm. Note that the same target > string is used throughout the algorithm. > >The sentence "If not, the process halts." is incorrect since this would >mean you can never see alternative records that may match but have >different Services fields. The sentence should read like this: > >"If not, then continue with the next record in the existing list of records >and do the match/Service field examiniation step again." > >This has been fixed for a while in draft-ietf-urn-ddds-04.txt. I hope >that we can see the DDDS documents out as RFCs soon... Thanks Mike ! A note to list readers ... when this document is finished it will Replace RFC 2915 as the definitive definition of NAPTR records. Documents being developed by our colleagues in ITU Study Group 2 should reflect this fact. I'm sure we'll also see a form of IANA registration procedure for the protocol element etc aka "SIP+E2U" ? >Thanks to James for catching this one! > >-MM > >-- >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Michael Mealling | Vote Libertarian! | urn:pin:1 >michael@neonym.net | | http://www.neonym.net > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 21 11:23:00 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA20055 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:22:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA26951; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:08:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA26920 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:08:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA19197 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:06:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id KAA00964; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:08:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: from unknown(192.168.20.227) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xmad00940; Tue, 21 Aug 01 10:07:52 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010821105049.02d12d90@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:08:01 -0400 To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" , enum@ietf.org From: Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84C2@vsvapostal3.prod.ne tsol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 02:22 PM 8/20/2001 -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: >In the spirit of the note Patrik sent earlier today, I've written the >individual submission I-D described below. It's intended to be a "stake in >the ground" for discussion using example data derived from RFC 2916. > > And on behalf of my co-chair ..I'd like to thank you for the submission. This is indeed a useful contribution to thoughtful technical discussion of ENUM related issues. However I would want to point out that the problem statement that this document addresses is a potential tool for ENUM provisioning between various entities that is specifically under the authority of national administrations of E.164 resources as outlined in RFC2916 in RFC 3026. Though, of course, it could be used in private implementations of ENUM technology where applicable. A note to list readers: Concepts outlined in this draft have been developed in the IETF provreg working group that is developing protocols for Domain Name registration. http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/provreg-charter.html >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. > > > Title : Extensible Provisioning Protocol E.164 Number >Mapping > Author(s) : S. Hollenbeck > Filename : draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > Pages : 39 > Date : 17-Aug-01 > >This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) >mapping for the provisioning and management of E.164 numbers stored in >a shared central repository. Specified in XML, the mapping defines >EPP command syntax and semantics as applied to E.164 numbers. > >A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > >Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username >"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, >type "cd internet-drafts" and then > "get draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt". > >A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > >Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >Send a message to: > mailserv@ietf.org. >In the body type: > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt". > >NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > how to manipulate these messages. > > >Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >Internet-Draft. > > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 21 11:41:39 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA21182 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:41:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA27931; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:29:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA27900 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:29:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bailey.dscga.com (bailey.dscga.com [198.78.9.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA20343 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:28:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from michael@localhost) by bailey.dscga.com (8.9.1/) id LAA21517; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:25:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:25:47 -0400 From: Michael Mealling To: Richard Shockey Cc: enum@ietf.org, michaelm@neonym.net Subject: Re: [Enum] a bug in RFC 2915 (fixed in draft-ietf-urn-ddds-04.txt) Message-ID: <20010821112547.G17352@bailey.dscga.com> Reply-To: Michael Mealling References: <20010820144426.S17352@bailey.dscga.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010821103953.02d12750@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.2i In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010821103953.02d12750@127.0.0.1>; from rich.shockey@neustar.com on Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 10:49:40AM -0400 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 10:49:40AM -0400, Richard Shockey wrote: > I'm sure we'll also see a form of IANA registration procedure for the > protocol element etc aka "SIP+E2U" ? I think the group will need to define what the difference is between the 'protocol' in the Service field and the URI scheme. The format you guys are using gives you the ability to say 1 protocol and n services. IMHO, the protocol should be the on the wire protocol and the service should be the class of things the end point exposes. I.e. "sip+E2IM" would mean this node handles E.164 to Instant Messaging end point via the SIP protocol. It can also handle a range of services such as 'sip+E2IM+E2V+E2P+E2EMAIL' where E2V is E.164 number to a voice capable end point, E2P could be presence. This allows you to say things like "this end point is for IM style stuff and it uses SIP" but "this end point does voice via H.323" and "this end point handles SMTP email". As things currently stand you only know the URI scheme. You have no way to differentiate between two end points as to what actual functions they can handle.... Its a simple fix, though.... -MM -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Mealling | Vote Libertarian! | urn:pin:1 michael@neonym.net | | http://www.neonym.net _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 21 11:45:56 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA21319 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:45:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA28438; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:35:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA28403 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:34:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heron.verisign.com (heron.verisign.com [216.168.233.95]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA20675 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:33:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from VSVAPOSTALGW1.prod.netsol.com (vsvapostalgw1.prod.netsol.com [216.168.234.201]) by heron.verisign.com (nsi_0.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA27183 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:34:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: by VSVAPOSTALGW1.prod.netsol.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:34:04 -0400 Message-ID: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84CB@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com> From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" To: enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:28:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org >-----Original Message----- >From: Richard Shockey [mailto:rich.shockey@neustar.com] >Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 11:08 AM >To: Hollenbeck, Scott; enum@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > >And on behalf of my co-chair ..I'd like to thank you for the submission. >This is indeed a useful contribution to thoughtful technical discussion of >ENUM related issues. However I would want to point out that the problem >statement that this document addresses is a potential tool for ENUM >provisioning between various entities that is specifically under the >authority of national administrations of E.164 resources as outlined in >RFC2916 in RFC 3026. The "authority" issue is precisely why the draft prominently references 2916 and makes no statement anywhere about who manages the E.164 resources. A non-normative reference to 3026 could be added to make readers aware of current thought; such discussion certainly doesn't belong in this document. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 21 12:03:29 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA22063 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:03:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA29202; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:52:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA29168 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:52:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com [171.71.163.10]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA21543 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:51:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-av-3.cisco.com (sj-msg-av-3.cisco.com [171.69.2.19]) by sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (8.11.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id f7LFpqn15248; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:51:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sj-msg-av-3.cisco.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7LFpf800480; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CHSHARP-W2K1.cisco.com (rtp-vpn-56.cisco.com [10.82.192.56]) by mailman.cisco.com (8.9.3/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id IAA20299; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:51:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010821114346.01f8bce8@dogwood.cisco.com> X-Sender: chsharp@dogwood.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 11:51:13 -0400 To: Richard Shockey From: Chip Sharp Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: "Hollenbeck, Scott" , enum@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010821105049.02d12d90@127.0.0.1> References: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84C2@vsvapostal3.prod.ne tsol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 11:08 AM 8/21/2001, Richard Shockey wrote: >At 02:22 PM 8/20/2001 -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: >>In the spirit of the note Patrik sent earlier today, I've written the >>individual submission I-D described below. It's intended to be a "stake in >>the ground" for discussion using example data derived from RFC 2916. >> >> > > >And on behalf of my co-chair ..I'd like to thank you for the submission. >This is indeed a useful contribution to thoughtful technical discussion of >ENUM related issues. However I would want to point out that the problem >statement that this document addresses is a potential tool for ENUM >provisioning between various entities that is specifically under the >authority of national administrations of E.164 resources as outlined in >RFC2916 in RFC 3026. I don't understand the last sentence. Could you please clarify? Aren't we talking about DNS provisioning? I have suggested in a private email to Scott that he consider just defining a and/or object for EPP. That would take care of the provisioning requirements for DNS to support NAPTR records (and thus RFC2916). The current provreg epp drafts (e.g., host, contact, domain) should cover the rest. Chip >Though, of course, it could be used in private implementations of ENUM >technology where applicable. > >A note to list readers: Concepts outlined in this draft have been >developed in the IETF provreg working group that is developing protocols >for Domain Name registration. > >http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/provreg-charter.html > >>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>directories. >> >> >> Title : Extensible Provisioning Protocol E.164 Number >>Mapping >> Author(s) : S. Hollenbeck >> Filename : draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt >> Pages : 39 >> Date : 17-Aug-01 >> >>This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) >>mapping for the provisioning and management of E.164 numbers stored in >>a shared central repository. Specified in XML, the mapping defines >>EPP command syntax and semantics as applied to E.164 numbers. >> >>A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt >> >>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username >>"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, >>type "cd internet-drafts" and then >> "get draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt". >> >>A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >>http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >>or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >> >> >>Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >> >>Send a message to: >> mailserv@ietf.org. >>In the body type: >> "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt". >> >>NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in >> MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this >> feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" >> command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or >> a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers >> exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with >> "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split >> up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on >> how to manipulate these messages. >> >> >>Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >>implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >>Internet-Draft. >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>enum mailing list >>enum@ietf.org >>http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives >NeuStar Inc. >45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 >1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 >Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 > or > > > ><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 21 14:44:01 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA27409 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:44:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA04741; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:34:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA04710 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:34:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA26906 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:32:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id NAA01177; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:34:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: from unknown(192.168.20.227) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xmaa01167; Tue, 21 Aug 01 13:33:58 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010821120521.03461dd0@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:32:00 -0400 To: Chip Sharp From: Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: "Hollenbeck, Scott" , enum@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010821114346.01f8bce8@dogwood.cisco.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010821105049.02d12d90@127.0.0.1> <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84C2@vsvapostal3.prod.ne tsol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 11:51 AM 8/21/2001 -0400, Chip Sharp wrote: >At 11:08 AM 8/21/2001, Richard Shockey wrote: >>At 02:22 PM 8/20/2001 -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: >>>In the spirit of the note Patrik sent earlier today, I've written the >>>individual submission I-D described below. It's intended to be a "stake in >>>the ground" for discussion using example data derived from RFC 2916. >>> >>> >> >> >>And on behalf of my co-chair ..I'd like to thank you for the submission. >>This is indeed a useful contribution to thoughtful technical discussion >>of ENUM related issues. However I would want to point out that the >>problem statement that this document addresses is a potential tool for >>ENUM provisioning between various entities that is specifically under the >>authority of national administrations of E.164 resources as outlined in >>RFC2916 in RFC 3026. > >I don't understand the last sentence. Could you please clarify? Aren't >we talking about DNS provisioning? Yes ..but the rules and tools by which a particular E.164 resource is provisioned under e164.arpa will come under the jurisdiction of the appropriate E.164 resource holder. That is what the liaison statement in 3026 describes based on 2916. That means, for instance, that the Government of the United Kingdom is ultimately responsible for how its portion of the E.164 plan [4.4.e164.arpa] is to be administered and provisioned. We can only make useful recommendations and offer hints to proper tools but we IMHO cannot be prescriptive as to what solutions are appropriate. Its very clear to me that business rules and policy considerations for ENUM provisioning in Europe will be very different that in North America. That should not be suprising to anyone since the administration of numbering plans in Europe are different for each country. There is much fine work going on the Administration of ENUM in Europe by ETSI and I'm aware that they are making substantive progress. Again, Scott's draft is a useful and thoughtful first step in helping potential E.164 resource administrators understand what kinds of options may be available to them for provisioning such records and considering the advanced state of discussions in several countries about ENUM deployment. France, for instance determine that SOAP or something else is more appropriate protocol for provisioning these records. >I have suggested in a private email to Scott that he consider just >defining a and/or object for EPP. That would >take care of the provisioning requirements for DNS to support NAPTR >records (and thus RFC2916). The current provreg epp drafts (e.g., host, >contact, domain) should cover the rest. Well I can certainly think of a lot more requirements here but again they need to be defined in the context of national administrative policy. I've been tracking the work in provreg since its inception. >Chip > >>Though, of course, it could be used in private implementations of ENUM >>technology where applicable. >> >>A note to list readers: Concepts outlined in this draft have been >>developed in the IETF provreg working group that is developing protocols >>for Domain Name registration. >> >>http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/provreg-charter.html >> >>>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>>directories. >>> >>> >>> Title : Extensible Provisioning Protocol E.164 Number >>>Mapping >>> Author(s) : S. Hollenbeck >>> Filename : draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt >>> Pages : 39 >>> Date : 17-Aug-01 >>> >>>This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) >>>mapping for the provisioning and management of E.164 numbers stored in >>>a shared central repository. Specified in XML, the mapping defines >>>EPP command syntax and semantics as applied to E.164 numbers. >>> >>>A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt >>> >>>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username >>>"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, >>>type "cd internet-drafts" and then >>> "get draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt". >>> >>>A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >>>http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >>>or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>> >>> >>>Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >>> >>>Send a message to: >>> mailserv@ietf.org. >>>In the body type: >>> "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt". >>> >>>NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in >>> MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this >>> feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" >>> command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or >>> a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail >>> readers >>> exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with >>> "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split >>> up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on >>> how to manipulate these messages. >>> >>> >>>Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >>>implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >>>Internet-Draft. >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>enum mailing list >>>enum@ietf.org >>>http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives >>NeuStar Inc. >>45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 >>1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 >>Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 >> or >> >> >> >><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>enum mailing list >>enum@ietf.org >>http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives >NeuStar Inc. >45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 >1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 >Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 > or > > > ><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 21 20:32:11 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA03747 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:32:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA13302; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:19:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA13271 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:19:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA03641 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 20:18:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA08446 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 17:19:48 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010821170236.0318b008@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 17:18:51 -0700 To: enum@ietf.org From: Dave Crocker Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84CB@vsvapostal3.prod.ne tsol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 08:28 AM 8/21/2001, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: >The "authority" issue is precisely why the draft prominently references 2916 >and makes no statement anywhere about who manages the E.164 resources. A A rather basic source of tension for discussions combining standards with politics (or sociology) is the distinction between mechanism and policy. Until the Internet became a global service, the IETF had very little push-back when it failed to make this distinction. These days, almost anything that touches the DNS seems to bump into politics AND sociology. Hence we get VERY strong push-back to restrict our work to mechanism, and keep the heck away from policy. Specifying the precise set of data objects that are to be used for registration appears to be an example of intruding into policy. Policy is more than saying "who". It includes saying "how". The specifics concerning data semantics are part of the "how". At the very least, we need to distinguish between standardized syntax, versus "required" data semantics. Possibly we can standardize a means for registering (and maybe standardizing) the semantics of some data objects, without asserting the policy that they are required. On the other hand, a global requirement for interoperability might motivate requiring some, small set of data semantics. The above is probably fuzzier than I or anyone reading might like. I hope, nonetheless, the it suggests a line of discussion for clarifying and resolving Richard's point. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 21 23:08:49 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA07261 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:08:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id WAA17218; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:54:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id WAA17187 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:54:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail1.telefonica.com.ar (mail.telefonica.com.ar [168.226.49.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA07114 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 22:52:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by MAIL1 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 23:46:42 -0300 Message-ID: <49BB9783DE7FD411A29D00508B6F0AD804D443A6@MSTELEFONICA1> From: Zappacosta Rolando Jorge To: enum@ietf.org Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:05:04 -0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain Subject: [Enum] unsuscribe Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org unsuscribe _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 02:46:11 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA26595 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:46:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA00882; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:34:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA00852 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:34:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA26363 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:33:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA11157; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:34:05 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:33:23 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Zappacosta Rolando Jorge , enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] unsuscribe Message-ID: <215195.998469203@localhost> In-Reply-To: <49BB9783DE7FD411A29D00508B6F0AD804D443A6@MSTELEFONICA1> References: <49BB9783DE7FD411A29D00508B6F0AD804D443A6@MSTELEFONICA1> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-21 10.05 -0300 Zappacosta Rolando Jorge wrote: > unsuscribe > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum See webpage listed above, in the footer of each mail on this mailing list, for information on how to unsubscribe. Regards, Patrik _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 03:39:18 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA26600 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:46:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA00927; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:35:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id CAA00896 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:35:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA26377 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 02:33:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA11147; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:34:03 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:32:17 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Richard Shockey , Chip Sharp cc: "Hollenbeck, Scott" , enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Message-ID: <211238.998469137@localhost> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010821120521.03461dd0@127.0.0.1> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010821105049.02d12d90@127.0.0.1> <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84C2@vsvapostal3.prod.ne tsol.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010821120521.03461dd0@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-21 14.32 -0400 Richard Shockey wrote: > That means, for instance, that the > Government of the United Kingdom is ultimately responsible for how its > portion of the E.164 plan [4.4.e164.arpa] is to be administered and > provisioned. If we translate into DNS terms, I think you say that it is the Government of the United Kingdom which decides what policy is to be applied to domain name provisioning for subdomains of 4.4.e164.arpa? I.e. in the .com domain, the policy is quite simple, first come first serve, but in some other domains already today (like .se) the policy is more detailed regarding who can request delegation of what domainname. What you say seems to be "only" state that when provisioning E.164 numbers, we already know who is to decide what the policy is to be in the domainnames which represents the CC's existing in E.164 space? paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 03:41:38 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA27115 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 03:41:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA02470; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 03:30:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA02430 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 03:30:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailrelay2.mc2.net (mailrelay2.ornis.com [195.101.197.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA26928 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 03:29:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from Intranet (mailgate3.mc2.net [194.133.125.94] (may be forged)) by mailrelay2.mc2.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7M6P1017296 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:25:02 +0200 Received: from st1093 ([139.100.10.93]) by Intranet (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.6a) with SMTP id 2001082209231841:3948 ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:23:18 +0200 Message-ID: <000d01c12adc$444922e0$5d0a648b@st1093> From: "Stanislas Bourgain" To: Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:30:06 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on Intranet/ART(Release 5.0.6a |January 17, 2001) at 22/08/2001 09:23:18, Serialize by Router on Intranet/ART(Release 5.0.6a |January 17, 2001) at 22/08/2001 09:23:19 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01C12AED.07C12A00" Subject: [Enum] (no subject) Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C12AED.07C12A00 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000A_01C12AED.07C12A00" ------=_NextPart_001_000A_01C12AED.07C12A00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ------=_NextPart_001_000A_01C12AED.07C12A00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
------=_NextPart_001_000A_01C12AED.07C12A00-- ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C12AED.07C12A00 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; name="Stanislas Bourgain.vcf" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Stanislas Bourgain.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BEGIN:VCARD VERSION:2.1 N:Bourgain;Stanislas;;Charg=E9 de mission FN:Stanislas Bourgain ORG:Autorit=E9 de R=E9gulation des T=E9l=E9communications;Interconnexion et= Nouvelles Technologies TITLE:charg=E9 de mission TEL;WORK;VOICE:+33 1 40 47 71 06 TEL;WORK;FAX:+ 33 1 40 47 71 88 ADR;WORK:;;7, square Max Hymans;PARIS 15;;75730;FRANCE LABEL;WORK;ENCODING=3DQUOTED-PRINTABLE:7, square Max Hymans=3D0D=3D0APARIS = 15 75730=3D0D=3D0AFRANCE URL: URL:http://www.art-telecom.fr EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:stanislas.bourgain@art-telecom.fr REV:20010822T073006Z END:VCARD ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C12AED.07C12A00-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 07:50:26 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA00965 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:50:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA08496; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:36:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA08469 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:36:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.idashes.net ([128.242.193.178]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA00279 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:35:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from Cartman [66.36.28.106] by mail.idashes.net (SMTPD32-7.00) id A8FF185007C; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:35:27 -0400 From: "Pat Conley" To: =?US-ASCII?Q?Patrik_Faltstrom?= , "Richard Shockey" , "Chip Sharp" Cc: "Hollenbeck, Scott" , Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:39:02 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <211238.998469137@localhost> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit But it is very interesting how difficult it is to separate the politics and technology... the layers just go on and on. For example, the simple statement it is the Government of the United Kingdom which decides what policy is to be applied to domain ... arpa is itself a policy/political decision, not a technical one. pat -----Original Message----- From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Patrik Faltstrom Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 2:32 AM To: Richard Shockey; Chip Sharp Cc: Hollenbeck, Scott; enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt --On 01-08-21 14.32 -0400 Richard Shockey wrote: > That means, for instance, that the > Government of the United Kingdom is ultimately responsible for how its > portion of the E.164 plan [4.4.e164.arpa] is to be administered and > provisioned. If we translate into DNS terms, I think you say that it is the Government of the United Kingdom which decides what policy is to be applied to domain name provisioning for subdomains of 4.4.e164.arpa? I.e. in the .com domain, the policy is quite simple, first come first serve, but in some other domains already today (like .se) the policy is more detailed regarding who can request delegation of what domainname. What you say seems to be "only" state that when provisioning E.164 numbers, we already know who is to decide what the policy is to be in the domainnames which represents the CC's existing in E.164 space? paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 08:21:43 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA02361 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:21:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA09228; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:09:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA09197 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:09:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA01653 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 08:07:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA20463; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:08:00 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:06:07 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Pat Conley , Richard Shockey , Chip Sharp cc: "Hollenbeck, Scott" , enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Message-ID: <1413042.998489167@localhost> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id IAA09198 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --On 01-08-22 07.39 -0400 Pat Conley wrote: > But it is very interesting how difficult it is to separate the > politics and technology... the layers just go on and on. For > example, the simple statement > > it is the Government of the United Kingdom which decides > what policy is to be applied to domain ... arpa > > is itself a policy/political decision, not a technical one. You missed the point I tried to make. Just because the DNS work the way it does (technical implication) there is one and only one entity at every zone cut which is to make the decision on policy etc below that point. So, as the government of united kingdom already have the CC 44 according to international agreements, if RFC 2916 is followed (which uses DNS) it is the government of the united kingdom which decides what happens below the point 4.4.e164.arpa. What you seem to imply is that I talked about what the policy should be inside 4.4.e164.arpa and what the process should be for assignment of things in that domain, but I didn't. I just pointed out where the process belongs. Given such a monopolistic situation at every zone cut, what should be done to ensure competition? Well, we already have that situation in the DNS, and there the idea "we" have today for ".com" ICANN as the party deciding about new TLD's, a registry (Verisign Global Registry System) and a number of registrars. The registrars are multiple and that is how "we" belive competition is ensured. Exactly the same model can be used at any place where a zonecut is made in DNS, including at 4.4.164.arpa. Other models might exist than this "oversight"+"registry"+"registar", but I have not seen any. I have also not heard any generic complaints on it more than discussions on how to move responsibilities between these three parties. For example, in Sweden the registry sends out the invoice while for .com the registrars do it. That doesn't change the general model though. If you have a different model which you are thinking of, please let us know. paf > pat > > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of > Patrik Faltstrom > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 2:32 AM > To: Richard Shockey; Chip Sharp > Cc: Hollenbeck, Scott; enum@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > --On 01-08-21 14.32 -0400 Richard Shockey > wrote: > >> That means, for instance, that the >> Government of the United Kingdom is ultimately responsible for how its >> portion of the E.164 plan [4.4.e164.arpa] is to be administered and >> provisioned. > > If we translate into DNS terms, I think you say that it is the Government > of the United Kingdom which decides what policy is to be applied to domain > name provisioning for subdomains of 4.4.e164.arpa? > > I.e. in the .com domain, the policy is quite simple, first come first > serve, but in some other domains already today (like .se) the policy is > more detailed regarding who can request delegation of what domainname. > > What you say seems to be "only" state that when provisioning E.164 > numbers, we already know who is to decide what the policy is to be in the > domainnames which represents the CC's existing in E.164 space? > > paf > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > Patrik Fältström Cisco Systems Consulting Engineer Office of the CSO Phone: (Stockholm) +46-8-6859131 (San Jose) +1-408-525-8509 PGP: 2DFC AAF6 16F0 F276 7843 2DC1 BC79 51D9 7D25 B8DC _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 09:35:54 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA07124 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:35:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA11114; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:06:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA11074 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:05:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.49]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA05026 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:04:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from worldnet ([12.88.172.148]) by mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010822130511.CBBM21828.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net@worldnet>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:05:11 +0000 From: "Judith Oppenheimer" To: =?iso-8859-1?B?J1BhdHJpayBG5Gx0c3Ry9m0n?= , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" Cc: "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:03:00 -0400 Message-ID: <03b501c12b0a$dc4bb160$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: <1413042.998489167@localhost> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bad example. ICANN is itself a gTLD monopoly, imposing on the domain name industry the same prescriptive and anti-competitive limitations we saw rejected yesterday by the U.S., within which, there is also no real competition. VeriSign Registry maintains a .com monopoly. The new ICANN-created registrars are merely resellers for the VeriSign Registry, the same function performed pre-ICANN by NSI domain name resellers (ISP's, etc.), who are now resellers for the new registrars. Registrar accreditation created no competition, but simply bumped the reseller function up the food chain, as ICANN placed itself on top of the food (and money) chain above NSI/VeriSign. The so-called competition imposed by ICANN is really just multi-level marketing. Is multi-level marketing the "competitive" model sought for ENUM? Judith > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of > Patrik Fältström > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 8:06 AM > To: Pat Conley; Richard Shockey; Chip Sharp > Cc: Hollenbeck, Scott; enum@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > --On 01-08-22 07.39 -0400 Pat Conley wrote: > > > But it is very interesting how difficult it is to separate the > > politics and technology... the layers just go on and on. For > > example, the simple statement > > > > it is the Government of the United Kingdom which decides > > what policy is to be applied to domain ... arpa > > > > is itself a policy/political decision, not a technical one. > > You missed the point I tried to make. Just because the DNS > work the way it > does (technical implication) there is one and only one entity > at every zone > cut which is to make the decision on policy etc below that point. > > So, as the government of united kingdom already have the CC > 44 according to > international agreements, if RFC 2916 is followed (which uses > DNS) it is > the government of the united kingdom which decides what > happens below the > point 4.4.e164.arpa. > > What you seem to imply is that I talked about what the policy > should be > inside 4.4.e164.arpa and what the process should be for assignment of > things in that domain, but I didn't. I just pointed out where > the process > belongs. > > Given such a monopolistic situation at every zone cut, what > should be done > to ensure competition? Well, we already have that situation > in the DNS, and > there the idea "we" have today for ".com" ICANN as the party > deciding about > new TLD's, a registry (Verisign Global Registry System) and a > number of > registrars. The registrars are multiple and that is how "we" belive > competition is ensured. > > Exactly the same model can be used at any place where a > zonecut is made in > DNS, including at 4.4.164.arpa. > > Other models might exist than this > "oversight"+"registry"+"registar", but I > have not seen any. I have also not heard any generic > complaints on it more > than discussions on how to move responsibilities between these three > parties. For example, in Sweden the registry sends out the > invoice while > for .com the registrars do it. That doesn't change the > general model though. > > If you have a different model which you are thinking of, > please let us know. > > paf > > > > pat > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of > > Patrik Faltstrom > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 2:32 AM > > To: Richard Shockey; Chip Sharp > > Cc: Hollenbeck, Scott; enum@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > > > > --On 01-08-21 14.32 -0400 Richard Shockey > > wrote: > > > >> That means, for instance, that the > >> Government of the United Kingdom is ultimately responsible > for how its > >> portion of the E.164 plan [4.4.e164.arpa] is to be > administered and > >> provisioned. > > > > If we translate into DNS terms, I think you say that it is > the Government > > of the United Kingdom which decides what policy is to be > applied to domain > > name provisioning for subdomains of 4.4.e164.arpa? > > > > I.e. in the .com domain, the policy is quite simple, first > come first > > serve, but in some other domains already today (like .se) > the policy is > > more detailed regarding who can request delegation of what > domainname. > > > > What you say seems to be "only" state that when provisioning E.164 > > numbers, we already know who is to decide what the policy > is to be in the > > domainnames which represents the CC's existing in E.164 space? > > > > paf > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > enum mailing list > > enum@ietf.org > > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > enum mailing list > > enum@ietf.org > > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > > > > > Patrik Fältström Cisco Systems > Consulting Engineer Office of the CSO > Phone: (Stockholm) +46-8-6859131 (San Jose) +1-408-525-8509 > PGP: 2DFC AAF6 16F0 F276 7843 2DC1 BC79 51D9 7D25 B8DC > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 09:52:35 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA08113 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:52:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA12219; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:43:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA12189 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:42:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA07442 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:41:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA12629; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:41:05 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:39:16 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Judith Oppenheimer , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" cc: "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Message-ID: <1748440.998494756@localhost> In-Reply-To: <03b501c12b0a$dc4bb160$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> References: <03b501c12b0a$dc4bb160$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-22 09.03 -0400 Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > Bad example. > > ICANN is itself a gTLD monopoly, imposing on the domain name industry the > same prescriptive and anti-competitive limitations we saw rejected > yesterday by the U.S., within which, there is also no real competition. Wrong. ICANN is the holder of the root zone, and as such defines what domains should go in that zone. > VeriSign Registry maintains a .com monopoly. Of course they are. Just like ICB Toll Free Consultancy is a monopoly holding the icbtollfree.com domain. Each domain _is_ by definition a monopoly. It's a technical limitation. As I said in my previous mail, you completely missed my point. > The new ICANN-created > registrars are merely resellers for the VeriSign Registry, Of course they are. > the same > function performed pre-ICANN by NSI domain name resellers (ISP's, etc.), > who are now resellers for the new registrars. Wrong. Please review what things the registrars and the ISP's etc do, and see that what they do are different things. > Registrar accreditation created no competition, but simply bumped the > reseller function up the food chain, as ICANN placed itself on top of the > food (and money) chain above NSI/VeriSign. Nope. > The so-called competition imposed by ICANN is really just multi-level > marketing. Is multi-level marketing the "competitive" model sought for > ENUM? As I said in my email, if you have a different model than the three-legged-chair I described which we use today, please let us know. I have still not seen any other model given the _technical_ limitation that you at every zone-cut in DNS have a monopoly. It doesn't matter how much you ask for competition. It's like asking for competition on telephone numbers, that anyone should be able to get whatever telephone number he wants. You are looking for a naming mechanism which doesn't have the _technical_ limitations DNS and other strict hierarchal naming mechanisms (like E.164 numbers, domainnames, DN's for certificates, ISBN, postal addresses etc). Many other people look for such naming mechanisms, including groups in the IETF. You have to first make up your mind what you are looking for, and working with, and then work within the limitations of that system. If you choose to work with hierarchal naming systems and DNS especially, you have some limitatations. It doesn't matter how much you ask for this to change. It will not. To solve your problems, you have to use a different system than DNS. This mailing list is about use of DNS. So please be more constructive. paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 10:52:15 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA11771 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:52:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA14033; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:41:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA13949 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:41:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.48]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA10943 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:40:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from worldnet ([12.88.173.157]) by mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010822144048.EDNA12058.mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net@worldnet>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:40:48 +0000 From: "Judith Oppenheimer" To: =?iso-8859-1?B?J1BhdHJpayBG5Gx0c3Ry9m0n?= , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" Cc: "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:39:03 -0400 Message-ID: <03d501c12b18$37d37920$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: <1748440.998494756@localhost> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Semantics, blatant inaccuracy, and FUD (where registrars and ISPs both sell domain names, they in that activity do the same thing.) I simply responded to your suggestion that ICANN presented a model for competition, which I believe for those who want a legitimate model, was constructive information. Judith > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of > Patrik Fältström > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 9:39 AM > To: Judith Oppenheimer; 'Pat Conley'; 'Richard Shockey'; 'Chip Sharp' > Cc: 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > --On 01-08-22 09.03 -0400 Judith Oppenheimer > > wrote: > > > Bad example. > > > > ICANN is itself a gTLD monopoly, imposing on the domain > name industry the > > same prescriptive and anti-competitive limitations we saw rejected > > yesterday by the U.S., within which, there is also no real > competition. > > Wrong. > > ICANN is the holder of the root zone, and as such defines what domains > should go in that zone. > > > VeriSign Registry maintains a .com monopoly. > > Of course they are. Just like ICB Toll Free Consultancy is a monopoly > holding the icbtollfree.com domain. > > Each domain _is_ by definition a monopoly. It's a technical > limitation. > > As I said in my previous mail, you completely missed my point. > > > The new ICANN-created > > registrars are merely resellers for the VeriSign Registry, > > Of course they are. > > > the same > > function performed pre-ICANN by NSI domain name resellers > (ISP's, etc.), > > who are now resellers for the new registrars. > > Wrong. Please review what things the registrars and the ISP's > etc do, and > see that what they do are different things. > > > Registrar accreditation created no competition, but simply > bumped the > > reseller function up the food chain, as ICANN placed itself > on top of the > > food (and money) chain above NSI/VeriSign. > > Nope. > > > The so-called competition imposed by ICANN is really just > multi-level > > marketing. Is multi-level marketing the "competitive" > model sought for > > ENUM? > > As I said in my email, if you have a different model than the > three-legged-chair I described which we use today, please let us know. > > I have still not seen any other model given the _technical_ > limitation that > you at every zone-cut in DNS have a monopoly. > > It doesn't matter how much you ask for competition. > > It's like asking for competition on telephone numbers, that > anyone should > be able to get whatever telephone number he wants. > > You are looking for a naming mechanism which doesn't have the > _technical_ > limitations DNS and other strict hierarchal naming mechanisms > (like E.164 > numbers, domainnames, DN's for certificates, ISBN, postal > addresses etc). > > Many other people look for such naming mechanisms, including > groups in the > IETF. > > You have to first make up your mind what you are looking for, > and working > with, and then work within the limitations of that system. If > you choose to > work with hierarchal naming systems and DNS especially, you have some > limitatations. > > It doesn't matter how much you ask for this to change. > > It will not. > > To solve your problems, you have to use a different system > than DNS. This > mailing list is about use of DNS. So please be more constructive. > > paf > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 10:57:20 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA11966 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:57:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA14181; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:46:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA14145 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:45:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shell.nominum.com (shell.nominum.com [128.177.192.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA11240 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:44:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shell.nominum.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by shell.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D74A3190E; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:45:28 -0700 (PDT) To: "Judith Oppenheimer" Cc: =?iso-8859-1?B?J1BhdHJpayBG5Gx0c3Ry9m0n?= , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: Message from "Judith Oppenheimer" of "Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:03:00 EDT." <03b501c12b0a$dc4bb160$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:45:28 -0700 Message-ID: <99011.998491528@shell.nominum.com> From: Jim Reid Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org >>>>> "Judith" == Judith Oppenheimer writes: Judith> Bad example. ICANN is itself a gTLD monopoly, imposing on Judith> the domain name industry the same prescriptive and Judith> anti-competitive limitations we saw rejected yesterday by Judith> the U.S., within which, there is also no real competition. This, like the rest of your posting, is wrong and completely misses the point. Whenever a name space contains unique identifiers -- domain names, telephone numbers, car licence plates, whatever -- there can be only one authority that issues them. That's the nature of unique names: by definition there's only one place to get them from. The logical conclusion of your argument is that things like passport numbers or social security numbers are monopolistic and anti competitive. This is absurd. The model Patrik is proposing for ENUM is not just sensible, it's the only one that will work in the real world. Governments will decide what they will do with their Tier-1 ENUM resource, presumably in consultation with interested parties like telco operators, regulators, industry associations, consumer groups and the country's ccTLD registry. How a government decides to define the framework for operating that resource will be up to them. This may or may not include competing registrars and telcos feeding ENUM records into the DNS via the nation's (non-profit?) ENUM registry. That decision has to be a matter of national -- in some cases international -- policy. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 11:09:15 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA12488 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:09:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA14572; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:59:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA14541 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:59:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA12000 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 10:58:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA01380; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:59:13 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822075254.03c8ec90@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 07:59:20 -0700 To: "Judith Oppenheimer" From: Dave Crocker Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: In-Reply-To: <03d501c12b18$37d37920$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> References: <1748440.998494756@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 07:39 AM 8/22/2001, Judith Oppenheimer wrote: >Semantics, blatant inaccuracy, and FUD You are correct, Judith, and we should all applaud your self-disclosure. But having you acknowledge your own behavior does not respond to the key point/question that Patrik made: Every node in the DNS requires a single registry. Calling that registry a monopoly is nicely emotional, but it ignores the technical constraint that dictates having only one authority for each node. Rather than pursue emotional excitement, please respond substatively to Patrik's point about the issue of technical limitations imposed by the nature of the DNS. Again, as Patrik said, if you want a different technical model, then offer a specification and get it reviewed and accepted by the technical community. Remember. This mailing list is for IETF *technical* discussions about implementation of ENUM. That is, telephone numbers as DNS names. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 11:18:41 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA13055 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:18:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA15280; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:08:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA15252 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:08:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.49]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA12416 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:07:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from worldnet ([12.88.173.157]) by mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010822150810.EACF21828.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net@worldnet>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:08:10 +0000 From: "Judith Oppenheimer" To: "'Jim Reid'" Cc: =?iso-8859-1?B?J1BhdHJpayBG5Gx0c3Ry9m0n?= , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:02:27 -0400 Message-ID: <03de01c12b1c$0ac44c80$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: <99011.998491528@shell.nominum.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Without beating this horse to death, I didn't say it wasn't a national issue. From a telephone numbering standpoint I agree with you that it is. (I think I've made that clear on the other ENUM list. My concern is that the FCC rep doesn't seem to agree.) I simply said ICANN wasn't a legitimate model. For competition or for anything else. J p.s. Patrik: Its the U.S. Dept of Commerce that controls the root zone via contract with ICANN. > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Jim > Reid > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:45 AM > To: Judith Oppenheimer > Cc: 'Patrik Fältström'; 'Pat Conley'; 'Richard Shockey'; 'Chip Sharp'; > 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > >>>>> "Judith" == Judith Oppenheimer > writes: > > Judith> Bad example. ICANN is itself a gTLD monopoly, imposing on > Judith> the domain name industry the same prescriptive and > Judith> anti-competitive limitations we saw rejected yesterday by > Judith> the U.S., within which, there is also no real competition. > > This, like the rest of your posting, is wrong and completely misses > the point. Whenever a name space contains unique identifiers -- domain > names, telephone numbers, car licence plates, whatever -- there can be > only one authority that issues them. That's the nature of unique > names: by definition there's only one place to get them from. The > logical conclusion of your argument is that things like passport > numbers or social security numbers are monopolistic and anti > competitive. This is absurd. > > The model Patrik is proposing for ENUM is not just sensible, it's the > only one that will work in the real world. Governments will decide > what they will do with their Tier-1 ENUM resource, presumably in > consultation with interested parties like telco operators, regulators, > industry associations, consumer groups and the country's ccTLD > registry. How a government decides to define the framework for > operating that resource will be up to them. This may or may not > include competing registrars and telcos feeding ENUM records into the > DNS via the nation's (non-profit?) ENUM registry. That decision has to > be a matter of national -- in some cases international -- policy. > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 11:30:13 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA13506 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:30:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA15915; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:21:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA15887 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:21:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA13119 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:20:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA05307; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:19:35 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:19:17 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Judith Oppenheimer , "'Jim Reid'" cc: "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Message-ID: <2108469.998500757@localhost> In-Reply-To: <03de01c12b1c$0ac44c80$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> References: <03de01c12b1c$0ac44c80$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-22 11.02 -0400 Judith Oppenheimer wrote: > I simply said ICANN wasn't a legitimate model. For competition or for > anything else. First: Are you complaining about ICANN or the model? You say you complain about the model, which uses one admin, one registrar and many registrants. But, then you talk explicitly about ICANN. Given that this is a place for technical discussions, I, Jim and now also Dave have asked you to present a different model than the one the "admin"+"registry"+"registrars" which still acknowledges the technical constraints of DNS. Until you send such a description, please keep your comments for yourself. Just saying something is bad without coming with alternatives is not really something which I appreciate in discussions. And I am pretty sure I am not the only one. If you don't have a different model, then you are complaining about ICANN and not the model. Those complaints you have to take somewhere else. > p.s. Patrik: Its the U.S. Dept of Commerce that controls the root zone > via contract with ICANN. It all depends on how you read the contract between DoC and ICANN, and what value you put on the words. You have to define the word "control" before you can issue a statement like the one above. paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 11:35:22 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA13719 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:35:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA16176; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:27:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA16136 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:27:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.idashes.net ([128.242.193.178]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA13370 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:26:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from Cartman [66.36.28.106] by mail.idashes.net (SMTPD32-7.00) id AF1D242007C; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:26:21 -0400 From: "Pat Conley" To: "Jim Reid" , "Judith Oppenheimer" Cc: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?'Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m'?=" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:29:56 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <99011.998491528@shell.nominum.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit With this technical point made earlier... Whenever a name space contains unique identifiers -- domain names, telephone numbers, car licence plates, whatever -- there can be only one authority that issues them. I respectfully disagree if by "one authority" you mean "one system". There are 2 very common models in the database world. One... like ENUM... relies on a central authority to enforce the desired uniquenss. Another... like UDDI... allows for multi masters of the information. Of course, there are mechanisms to resolve the conflicts when the same name/key/identifier is allocated by two masters at the same time. The "mastery" is a shared responsibility across systems (and companies). Each mechanism has its advantages and disadvantages which make it appropriate for different problems. I am not suggesting that ENUM is using the wrong solution by any means, only that there are other technical models. pat -----Original Message----- From: Jim Reid [mailto:Jim.Reid@nominum.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:45 AM To: Judith Oppenheimer Cc: 'Patrik Fältström'; 'Pat Conley'; 'Richard Shockey'; 'Chip Sharp'; 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt >>>>> "Judith" == Judith Oppenheimer writes: Judith> Bad example. ICANN is itself a gTLD monopoly, imposing on Judith> the domain name industry the same prescriptive and Judith> anti-competitive limitations we saw rejected yesterday by Judith> the U.S., within which, there is also no real competition. This, like the rest of your posting, is wrong and completely misses the point. Whenever a name space contains unique identifiers -- domain names, telephone numbers, car licence plates, whatever -- there can be only one authority that issues them. That's the nature of unique names: by definition there's only one place to get them from. The logical conclusion of your argument is that things like passport numbers or social security numbers are monopolistic and anti competitive. This is absurd. The model Patrik is proposing for ENUM is not just sensible, it's the only one that will work in the real world. Governments will decide what they will do with their Tier-1 ENUM resource, presumably in consultation with interested parties like telco operators, regulators, industry associations, consumer groups and the country's ccTLD registry. How a government decides to define the framework for operating that resource will be up to them. This may or may not include competing registrars and telcos feeding ENUM records into the DNS via the nation's (non-profit?) ENUM registry. That decision has to be a matter of national -- in some cases international -- policy. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 11:59:48 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA14697 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:59:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA17272; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:49:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA17240 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:49:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA14254 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:47:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA10573; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:47:38 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:43:37 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Pat Conley , Jim Reid , Judith Oppenheimer cc: "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Message-ID: <2196088.998502217@localhost> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-22 11.29 -0400 Pat Conley wrote: > With this technical point made earlier... > > Whenever a name space contains unique identifiers -- domain > names, telephone numbers, car licence plates, whatever -- there > can be only one authority that issues them. > > I respectfully disagree if by "one authority" you mean "one system". > There are 2 very common models in the database world. One... like > ENUM... relies on a central authority to enforce the desired uniquenss. > Another... like UDDI... allows for multi masters of the information. > Of course, there are mechanisms to resolve the conflicts when the same > name/key/identifier is allocated by two masters at the same time. The > "mastery" is a shared responsibility across systems (and companies). > Each mechanism has its advantages and disadvantages which make it > appropriate for different problems. > > I am not suggesting that ENUM is using the wrong solution by any means, > only that there are other technical models. You are absolutely correct in this, but, let me clearify why I see this still be within the same model myself and Jim talked about. A database where one have true multi-master capabilities is extremely hard to realise, even only from a theoretical database model point of view. It is much easier to have "shared responsibilities" via a shared media where one can make a "lock" on shared resources, or allocate the very identifier which needs to be unique. The lock on those identifiers can be rolled back if later the transaction in the client fails for some (other) reasons. In my view, this central mechanism is a registry. Much more thin than what Verisign is for .com and much thinner than many other registries like the one in Sweden. Actually, when I was in iPOC and later POC we did suggest such a system where the registrars themselves together create the registry. But, I still see the need for some (shared) place where locking of shared resources, creation of the zone file etc, happens, and I call that the registry, and what we now discuss is what things the registrars do, and what things the registry do. Because of this, I don't see your and my view being so different. Your mileage may vary. paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 12:01:22 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA14776 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:01:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA17397; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:52:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA17364 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:52:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA14395 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:51:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id ziqnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:53:13 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822113451.02838f48@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:52:44 -0400 To: Jim Reid , "Judith Oppenheimer" From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: enum@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <99011.998491528@shell.nominum.com> References: <03b501c12b0a$dc4bb160$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_92060926==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_92060926==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hi Jim, >only one that will work in the real world. Governments will decide >what they will do with their Tier-1 ENUM resource, presumably in >consultation with interested parties like telco operators, regulators, >industry associations, consumer groups and the country's ccTLD >registry. How a government decides to define the framework for >operating that resource will be up to them. This may or may not >include competing registrars and telcos feeding ENUM records into the >DNS via the nation's (non-profit?) ENUM registry. That decision has to >be a matter of national -- in some cases international -- policy. A number of parties in this Working Group have over the past 18 months proffered administrative implementation models and bicycled them into diverse regulatory forums at international and domestic levels. Turn out an I-D here, submit it as a contribution there. The term Tier-1 itself was manufactured out of some "individuals'" Internet Draft. Call it technical and in-scope for schema you favor one place; call it policy and out-of-scope for what don't like in another place. The discussion of registry-registrar options and protocols is no more out-of-scope or inappropriate than is the use of "tiers" and the dozens of pages of baggage now getting carted around under the rubric of "technical" discussions. Most of this should have been left to the marketplace where the Rose-Malamud plus Mealling-Daniel schema sank or swam, and this Group should have been terminated last Autumn. Instead it has emulated the CCITT and become a home for regulatory-loving players to turn out F-series "recommendations." I believe the USGOV regulatory agencies have recently expressed some definitive and strong concerns about what's been occurring. --tony --=====================_92060926==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Hi Jim,

only one that will work in the real world. Governments will decide
what they will do with their Tier-1 ENUM resource, presumably in
consultation with interested parties like telco operators, regulators,
industry associations, consumer groups and the country's ccTLD
registry. How a government decides to define the framework for
operating that resource will be up to them. This may or may not
include competing registrars and telcos feeding ENUM records into the
DNS via the nation's (non-profit?) ENUM registry. That decision has to
be a matter of national -- in some cases international -- policy.

A number of parties in this Working Group have over the past
18 months proffered administrative implementation models and
bicycled them into diverse regulatory forums at international
and domestic levels.  Turn out an I-D here, submit it as
a contribution there.  The term Tier-1 itself was manufactured
out of some "individuals'" Internet Draft.  Call it technical
and in-scope for schema you favor one place; call it policy and
out-of-scope for what don't like in another place.

The discussion of registry-registrar options and protocols is
no more out-of-scope or inappropriate than is the use of "tiers"
and the dozens of pages of baggage now getting carted around under
the rubric of "technical" discussions.

Most of this should have been left to the marketplace where the
Rose-Malamud plus Mealling-Daniel schema sank or swam, and
this Group should have been terminated last Autumn.  Instead
it has emulated the CCITT and become a home for regulatory-loving
players to turn out F-series "recommendations."

I believe the USGOV regulatory agencies have recently expressed
some definitive and strong concerns about what's been occurring.

--tony


 --=====================_92060926==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 12:15:25 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15239 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:15:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA18782; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:07:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA18755 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:07:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rainier.illuminet.com ([63.116.20.100]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA14899 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:05:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from olwinexsmtp01.corp.illuminet.com (olwinexsmtp01.corp.illuminet.com [172.20.1.9]) by rainier.illuminet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA11892; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by olwinexsmtp01.corp.illuminet.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:05:12 -0700 Message-ID: <1C1EEC765F843E44996971A80682118BBB8B63@opwinex01.corp.illuminet.com> From: Kevin McCandless To: "'Judith Oppenheimer'" , "'Jim Reid'" Cc: "'Patrik Faltstrom'" , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:05:11 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id MAA18756 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ICANN was developed solely to break up the Network Solutions monopoly hold on multiple TLDS domains and to add competition in providing the TLDs. K -----Original Message----- From: Judith Oppenheimer [mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:02 AM To: 'Jim Reid' Cc: 'Patrik Faltstrom'; 'Pat Conley'; 'Richard Shockey'; 'Chip Sharp'; 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Without beating this horse to death, I didn't say it wasn't a national issue. From a telephone numbering standpoint I agree with you that it is. (I think I've made that clear on the other ENUM list. My concern is that the FCC rep doesn't seem to agree.) I simply said ICANN wasn't a legitimate model. For competition or for anything else. J p.s. Patrik: Its the U.S. Dept of Commerce that controls the root zone via contract with ICANN. > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Jim > Reid > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:45 AM > To: Judith Oppenheimer > Cc: 'Patrik Fältström'; 'Pat Conley'; 'Richard Shockey'; 'Chip Sharp'; > 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > >>>>> "Judith" == Judith Oppenheimer > writes: > > Judith> Bad example. ICANN is itself a gTLD monopoly, imposing on > Judith> the domain name industry the same prescriptive and > Judith> anti-competitive limitations we saw rejected yesterday by > Judith> the U.S., within which, there is also no real competition. > > This, like the rest of your posting, is wrong and completely misses > the point. Whenever a name space contains unique identifiers -- domain > names, telephone numbers, car licence plates, whatever -- there can be > only one authority that issues them. That's the nature of unique > names: by definition there's only one place to get them from. The > logical conclusion of your argument is that things like passport > numbers or social security numbers are monopolistic and anti > competitive. This is absurd. > > The model Patrik is proposing for ENUM is not just sensible, it's the > only one that will work in the real world. Governments will decide > what they will do with their Tier-1 ENUM resource, presumably in > consultation with interested parties like telco operators, regulators, > industry associations, consumer groups and the country's ccTLD > registry. How a government decides to define the framework for > operating that resource will be up to them. This may or may not > include competing registrars and telcos feeding ENUM records into the > DNS via the nation's (non-profit?) ENUM registry. That decision has to > be a matter of national -- in some cases international -- policy. > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 12:16:06 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15257 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:16:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA18876; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:08:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA18840 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:08:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA14967 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:06:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id hjqnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:08:32 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822115603.02852dd0@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:08:03 -0400 To: Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , Judith Oppenheimer , "'Jim Reid'" From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: enum@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <2108469.998500757@localhost> References: <03de01c12b1c$0ac44c80$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> <03de01c12b1c$0ac44c80$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_92979357==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_92979357==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hi Patrik, > > p.s. Patrik: Its the U.S. Dept of Commerce that controls the root zone > > via contract with ICANN. > >It all depends on how you read the contract between DoC and ICANN, and what >value you put on the words. You have to define the word "control" before >you can issue a statement like the one above. The contracts involve more than just DOC and ICANN. I can assure, the parties to the contracts put value on the words. :-) It is directive letters of the Dept of Commerce that ultimately cause actions to occur. To coin Harry Truman's favorite phrase, "the buck stops" at the Dept of Commerce. --tony --=====================_92979357==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Hi Patrik,

> p.s.  Patrik:  Its the U.S. Dept of Commerce that controls the root zone
> via contract with ICANN.

It all depends on how you read the contract between DoC and ICANN, and what
value you put on the words. You have to define the word "control" before
you can issue a statement like the one above.

The contracts involve more than just DOC and ICANN.
I can assure, the parties to the contracts put value on
the words. :-)  It is  directive letters of the Dept of
Commerce that ultimately cause actions to occur. 
To coin Harry Truman's favorite phrase, "the buck stops"
at the Dept of Commerce.

--tony --=====================_92979357==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 12:33:59 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15846 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:33:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA19554; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:25:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA19523 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:25:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15516 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:23:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id rjqnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:25:34 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822122217.02858408@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:25:06 -0400 To: Kevin McCandless , "'Judith Oppenheimer'" , "'Jim Reid'" From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: enum@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <1C1EEC765F843E44996971A80682118BBB8B63@opwinex01.corp.illu minet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_94002288==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_94002288==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 12:05 PM 8/22/2001, Kevin McCandless wrote: >ICANN was developed solely to break up the Network Solutions monopoly hold >on multiple TLDS domains and to add competition in providing the TLDs. Kevin, If you check the NTIA policy proceeding record, you will note that ICANN was created to provide a collaborative forum for the IANA Function. --tony --=====================_94002288==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" At 12:05 PM 8/22/2001, Kevin McCandless wrote:
ICANN was developed solely to break up the Network Solutions monopoly hold
on multiple TLDS domains and to add competition in providing the TLDs.

Kevin,

If you check the NTIA policy proceeding record,
you will note that ICANN was created to provide
a collaborative forum for the IANA Function.

--tony --=====================_94002288==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 12:37:33 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15977 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:37:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA19715; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:27:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA19682 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:27:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.idashes.net ([128.242.193.178]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15565 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:26:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from Cartman [66.36.28.106] by mail.idashes.net (SMTPD32-7.00) id AD40269007C; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:26:40 -0400 From: "Pat Conley" To: =?US-ASCII?Q?Patrik_Faltstrom?= , "Jim Reid" , "Judith Oppenheimer" Cc: "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:30:15 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <2196088.998502217@localhost> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree. I have designed and developed several multi-master systems and they are often the WRONG solution. The advantages of the central system are simpicity (and surprisingly) reliability... though the two go hand-in-hand. pat Patrick J. Conley CTO and VP of Development iDashes.net 716 387-0770 x111 pconley@idashes.net -----Original Message----- From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Patrik Faltstrom Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:44 AM To: Pat Conley; Jim Reid; Judith Oppenheimer Cc: 'Richard Shockey'; 'Chip Sharp'; 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt --On 01-08-22 11.29 -0400 Pat Conley wrote: > With this technical point made earlier... > > Whenever a name space contains unique identifiers -- domain > names, telephone numbers, car licence plates, whatever -- there > can be only one authority that issues them. > > I respectfully disagree if by "one authority" you mean "one system". > There are 2 very common models in the database world. One... like > ENUM... relies on a central authority to enforce the desired uniquenss. > Another... like UDDI... allows for multi masters of the information. > Of course, there are mechanisms to resolve the conflicts when the same > name/key/identifier is allocated by two masters at the same time. The > "mastery" is a shared responsibility across systems (and companies). > Each mechanism has its advantages and disadvantages which make it > appropriate for different problems. > > I am not suggesting that ENUM is using the wrong solution by any means, > only that there are other technical models. You are absolutely correct in this, but, let me clearify why I see this still be within the same model myself and Jim talked about. A database where one have true multi-master capabilities is extremely hard to realise, even only from a theoretical database model point of view. It is much easier to have "shared responsibilities" via a shared media where one can make a "lock" on shared resources, or allocate the very identifier which needs to be unique. The lock on those identifiers can be rolled back if later the transaction in the client fails for some (other) reasons. In my view, this central mechanism is a registry. Much more thin than what Verisign is for .com and much thinner than many other registries like the one in Sweden. Actually, when I was in iPOC and later POC we did suggest such a system where the registrars themselves together create the registry. But, I still see the need for some (shared) place where locking of shared resources, creation of the zone file etc, happens, and I call that the registry, and what we now discuss is what things the registrars do, and what things the registry do. Because of this, I don't see your and my view being so different. Your mileage may vary. paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 12:43:21 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16162 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:43:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA20283; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:33:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA20250 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:33:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.49]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA15773 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:32:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from worldnet ([12.88.173.157]) by mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010822163258.FLHI21828.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net@worldnet>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:32:58 +0000 From: "Judith Oppenheimer" To: "'Kevin McCandless'" , "'Jim Reid'" Cc: "'Patrik Faltstrom'" , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:31:10 -0400 Message-ID: <041201c12b27$e3010ba0$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: <1C1EEC765F843E44996971A80682118BBB8B63@opwinex01.corp.illuminet.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ICANN was created to bypass the Administrative Procedures Act. To date it has succeeded. Re monopoly breakup, you might find this interesting: http://www.msnbc.com/news/540693.asp Judith > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On > Behalf Of Kevin > McCandless > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 12:05 PM > To: 'Judith Oppenheimer'; 'Jim Reid' > Cc: 'Patrik Faltstrom'; 'Pat Conley'; 'Richard Shockey'; 'Chip Sharp'; > 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > ICANN was developed solely to break up the Network Solutions > monopoly hold > on multiple TLDS domains and to add competition in providing the TLDs. > > K > > -----Original Message----- > From: Judith Oppenheimer [mailto:joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:02 AM > To: 'Jim Reid' > Cc: 'Patrik Faltstrom'; 'Pat Conley'; 'Richard Shockey'; 'Chip Sharp'; > 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > Without beating this horse to death, I didn't say it wasn't a national > issue. From a telephone numbering standpoint I agree with > you that it is. > (I think I've made that clear on the other ENUM list. My > concern is that > the FCC rep doesn't seem to agree.) > > I simply said ICANN wasn't a legitimate model. For competition or for > anything else. > > J > > p.s. Patrik: Its the U.S. Dept of Commerce that controls > the root zone > via contract with ICANN. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On > Behalf Of Jim > > Reid > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:45 AM > > To: Judith Oppenheimer > > Cc: 'Patrik Fältström'; 'Pat Conley'; 'Richard Shockey'; > 'Chip Sharp'; > > 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > > > > >>>>> "Judith" == Judith Oppenheimer > > writes: > > > > Judith> Bad example. ICANN is itself a gTLD monopoly, > imposing on > > Judith> the domain name industry the same prescriptive and > > Judith> anti-competitive limitations we saw rejected > yesterday by > > Judith> the U.S., within which, there is also no real > competition. > > > > This, like the rest of your posting, is wrong and completely misses > > the point. Whenever a name space contains unique > identifiers -- domain > > names, telephone numbers, car licence plates, whatever -- > there can be > > only one authority that issues them. That's the nature of unique > > names: by definition there's only one place to get them from. The > > logical conclusion of your argument is that things like passport > > numbers or social security numbers are monopolistic and anti > > competitive. This is absurd. > > > > The model Patrik is proposing for ENUM is not just > sensible, it's the > > only one that will work in the real world. Governments will decide > > what they will do with their Tier-1 ENUM resource, presumably in > > consultation with interested parties like telco operators, > regulators, > > industry associations, consumer groups and the country's ccTLD > > registry. How a government decides to define the framework for > > operating that resource will be up to them. This may or may not > > include competing registrars and telcos feeding ENUM > records into the > > DNS via the nation's (non-profit?) ENUM registry. That > decision has to > > be a matter of national -- in some cases international -- policy. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > enum mailing list > > enum@ietf.org > > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 13:04:13 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA16780 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:04:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA20997; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:54:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA20968 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:54:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shell.nominum.com (shell.nominum.com [128.177.192.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16410 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:53:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shell.nominum.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by shell.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 331F53190C; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:54:10 -0700 (PDT) To: Kevin McCandless Cc: "'Judith Oppenheimer'" , "'Patrik Faltstrom'" , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: Message from Kevin McCandless of "Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:05:11 PDT." <1C1EEC765F843E44996971A80682118BBB8B63@opwinex01.corp.illuminet.com> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:54:10 -0700 Message-ID: <1114.998499250@shell.nominum.com> From: Jim Reid Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org >>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin McCandless writes: Kevin> ICANN was developed solely to break up the Network Kevin> Solutions monopoly = hold on multiple TLDS domains and to Kevin> add competition in providing the TLDs. There are many places to debate ICANN and its work. This list is not one of them. Please take your prejudices about ICANN elsewhere. We discuss ENUM here and ICANN has no involvement in that at all. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 13:05:44 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA16893 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:05:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA21133; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:58:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA21103 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:58:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rainier.illuminet.com ([63.116.20.100]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16527 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:56:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from olwinexsmtp01.corp.illuminet.com (olwinexsmtp01.corp.illuminet.com [172.20.1.9]) by rainier.illuminet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA14535; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:56:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by olwinexsmtp01.corp.illuminet.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:56:12 -0700 Message-ID: <1C1EEC765F843E44996971A80682118BBB8B67@opwinex01.corp.illuminet.com> From: Kevin McCandless To: "'Jim Reid'" Cc: "'Judith Oppenheimer'" , "'Patrik Faltstrom'" , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 09:56:12 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org That is fine. But my comments do not reflect prejudices. Please do not add words to my comments. -----Original Message----- From: Jim Reid [mailto:Jim.Reid@nominum.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:54 AM To: Kevin McCandless Cc: 'Judith Oppenheimer'; 'Patrik Faltstrom'; 'Pat Conley'; 'Richard Shockey'; 'Chip Sharp'; 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt >>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin McCandless writes: Kevin> ICANN was developed solely to break up the Network Kevin> Solutions monopoly = hold on multiple TLDS domains and to Kevin> add competition in providing the TLDs. There are many places to debate ICANN and its work. This list is not one of them. Please take your prejudices about ICANN elsewhere. We discuss ENUM here and ICANN has no involvement in that at all. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 13:34:12 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA17797 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:34:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA21919; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:26:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA21888 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:26:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pds2.goodspeed.com (goodspeed4.coretel.net [162.33.160.188]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA17419 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:25:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [24.249.234.191] by pds2.410.ac (NTMail 6.00.0011/NY8829.00.3c5cf04d) with ESMTP id lahaaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:23:32 -0400 Message-ID: <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> From: "John D. Goodspeed" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , , , References: <1413042.998489167@localhost> Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:24:48 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Patrik, You stated that... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrik Fältström" > > So, as the government of united kingdom already have the CC 44 according to > international agreements, if RFC 2916 is followed (which uses DNS) it is > the government of the united kingdom which decides what happens below the > point 4.4.e164.arpa. > The question is whether or not it is healthy to have ITU or ICANN or the United Kingdom regulate what its citizens can and cannot do with their owned / leased telephone numbers on the Internet? Perhaps the UK would be benign to its citizens, perhaps not. Many countries will restrict freedom of information flow, monitor access, and engage in other consumer unfriendly activities under their slice of the the proposed x.x.x.e164.arpa pie. > Given such a monopolistic situation at every zone cut, what should be done > to ensure competition? Well, we already have that situation in the DNS, and > there the idea "we" have today for ".com" ICANN as the party deciding about > new TLD's, a registry (Verisign Global Registry System) and a number of > registrars. The registrars are multiple and that is how "we" belive > competition is ensured. > We currently do not have proper competition under ICANN and although you say that meaningful competition is not viable under ENUM I wonder if this has been thouroughly explored yet. Following the ICANN / DNS delegation model for telephone number assignment and control may put too much power in the wrong hands. Absolute control of ENUM Internet telephone numbers will be worse on a world wide basis than relative competitive anarchy of Internet telephone numbers. Many governments worldwide already have very restrictive Internet policies, please don't extend their tools of repression. > Exactly the same model can be used at any place where a zonecut is made in > DNS, including at 4.4.164.arpa. > paf However, the goal should not be international or national zonecut control of Internet phone numbers. The desired goal should be to give each and every telephone number owner / subscriber / leasee complete control over her or his (or its) telephone number. Niether the ITU nor ICANN nor the U.K. (over +44) nor the U.S. (over +1) should have any say over how we, the public, use our private Internet telephone numbers on the Internet. We have an excellent opportunity NOT to build barriers and NOT to establish gatekeepers. Please work toward keeping the private individual in control of their own private Internet phone number. John D. Goodspeed _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 13:57:16 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18486 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:57:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA22712; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:49:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA22681 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:49:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18205 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:48:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA03314; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:48:21 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:45:05 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: "John D. Goodspeed" , joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com, amr@netmagic.com, enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Message-ID: <2633352.998509505@localhost> In-Reply-To: <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> References: <1413042.998489167@localhost> <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-22 13.24 -0400 "John D. Goodspeed" wrote: >> So, as the government of united kingdom already have the CC 44 according >> to >> international agreements, if RFC 2916 is followed (which uses DNS) it is >> the government of the united kingdom which decides what happens below the >> point 4.4.e164.arpa. > > The question is whether or not it is healthy to have ITU or ICANN or the > United Kingdom regulate what its citizens can and cannot do with their > owned / leased telephone numbers on the Internet? Perhaps the UK would be > benign to its citizens, perhaps not. Many countries will restrict freedom > of information flow, monitor access, and engage in other consumer > unfriendly activities under their slice of the the proposed > x.x.x.e164.arpa pie. In that case what you ask for is a different identifier than E.164 which today the countries governments control. It is extremely hard, and I would say stupid, to inherit something without inheriting the whole thing. Bad things aswell as good things. ENUM can the way I see it only work if the handling of E.164 is in accordance with how the numbers really are used. Regardless of transport mechanism. If in some countries the users of the numbers feel they are too limited in what they can do, choose a different identifier which gives more freedom. paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 14:23:12 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA19195 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:23:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA23843; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:09:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA23812 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:09:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA18822 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:08:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id pkqnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:09:42 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822135340.02858550@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:09:13 -0400 To: Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , "John D. Goodspeed" , joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com, enum@ietf.org From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: <2633352.998509505@localhost> References: <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> <1413042.998489167@localhost> <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_100249731==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_100249731==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Patrik, >It is extremely hard, and I would say stupid, to inherit something without >inheriting the whole thing. Bad things aswell as good things. > >ENUM can the way I see it only work if the handling of E.164 is in >accordance with how the numbers really are used. Regardless of transport >mechanism. If in some countries the users of the numbers feel they are too The regulatory policy you describe is fundamentally contrary to that maintained by the U.S. in international forums over the past several years - which was re-emphasized several hours ago by an FCC official. The USGOV is not "stupid." It doesn't want to port 150 years of telecoms regulatory baggage to the Internet simply because someone wants to build a DNS namespace using telephone numbers. --tony --=====================_100249731==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Patrik,

It is extremely hard, and I would say stupid, to inherit something without
inheriting the whole thing. Bad things aswell as good things.

ENUM can the way I see it only work if the handling of E.164 is in
accordance with how the numbers really are used. Regardless of transport
mechanism. If in some countries the users of the numbers feel they are too

The regulatory policy you describe is fundamentally
contrary to that maintained by the U.S. in international
forums over the past several years - which was re-emphasized
several hours ago by an FCC official.

The USGOV is not "stupid."  It doesn't want to port 150 years
of telecoms regulatory baggage to the Internet simply because
someone wants to build a DNS namespace using telephone numbers.

--tony --=====================_100249731==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 14:50:21 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20300 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:50:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA25350; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:42:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA25231 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:42:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA19958 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:40:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id NAA02823; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:42:14 -0500 (CDT) Received: from unknown(209.173.49.244) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xmab02811; Wed, 22 Aug 01 13:41:45 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822143331.0377d3e0@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:37:22 -0400 To: Jim Reid , Kevin McCandless From: Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: "'Judith Oppenheimer'" , "'Patrik Faltstrom'" , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , enum@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <1114.998499250@shell.nominum.com> References: <1C1EEC765F843E44996971A80682118BBB8B63@opwinex01.corp.illuminet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 09:54 AM 8/22/2001 -0700, Jim Reid wrote: > >>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin McCandless writes: > > Kevin> ICANN was developed solely to break up the Network > Kevin> Solutions monopoly = hold on multiple TLDS domains and to > Kevin> add competition in providing the TLDs. > >There are many places to debate ICANN and its work. This list is not >one of them. Please take your prejudices about ICANN elsewhere. We >discuss ENUM here and ICANN has no involvement in that at all. As your ENUM co-chair ... Thank you Jim. Its not that we want to stifle debate here but as much as possible can we try to confine ourselves to technical issues surrounding 2916 ..please? And as a personal note ..you are correct there is NO ICANN involvement in ENUM. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 14:50:23 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20311 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:50:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA25262; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:42:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA25230 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:42:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA19957 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:40:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id NAA02820; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:42:14 -0500 (CDT) Received: from unknown(209.173.49.244) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xma002815; Wed, 22 Aug 01 13:42:09 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822143823.0377aae0@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:46:08 -0400 To: Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , "John D. Goodspeed" , joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com, enum@ietf.org From: Richard Shockey Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: <2633352.998509505@localhost> References: <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> <1413042.998489167@localhost> <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id OAA25232 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit At 07:45 PM 8/22/2001 +0200, Patrik Fältström wrote: >--On 01-08-22 13.24 -0400 "John D. Goodspeed" wrote: > > >> So, as the government of united kingdom already have the CC 44 according > >> to > >> international agreements, if RFC 2916 is followed (which uses DNS) it is > >> the government of the united kingdom which decides what happens below the > >> point 4.4.e164.arpa. > > > > The question is whether or not it is healthy to have ITU or ICANN or the > > United Kingdom regulate what its citizens can and cannot do with their > > owned / leased telephone numbers on the Internet? Do not make the assumption that citizens 'own' telephone numbers ... rights to use numbers and the policies surrounding them are matter of strictly left up to the E.164 resource holder. If I'm correct in the ITU context telephone numbers are not "owned" as such they are considered a "shared global resource" Though their may be substantial "rights to use" as in the case of 800 numbers etc. However those rights would terminate once service was terminated as well. > Perhaps the UK would be > > benign to its citizens, perhaps not. Many countries will restrict freedom > > of information flow, monitor access, and engage in other consumer > > unfriendly activities under their slice of the the proposed > > x.x.x.e164.arpa pie. > >In that case what you ask for is a different identifier than E.164 which >today the countries governments control. Thank you Patrik ... if this gentlemen wants another form of identifier we certainly have URI's. >It is extremely hard, and I would say stupid, to inherit something without >inheriting the whole thing. Bad things aswell as good things. > >ENUM can the way I see it only work if the handling of E.164 is in >accordance with how the numbers really are used. Regardless of transport >mechanism. If in some countries the users of the numbers feel they are too >limited in what they can do, choose a different identifier which gives more >freedom. > > paf >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 14:53:13 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20392 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:53:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA25472; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:45:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA25439 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:45:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bartok.sidn.nl (bartok.sidn.nl [193.176.144.164]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20072 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:43:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bartok.sidn.nl (localhost.sidn.nl [127.0.0.1]) by bartok.sidn.nl (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7MIidg04543; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:44:39 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jaap@bartok.sidn.nl) Message-Id: <200108221844.f7MIidg04543@bartok.sidn.nl> To: enum@ietf.org cc: Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:09:13 -0400. <5.1.0.14.2.20010822135340.02858550@mail.netmagic.com> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:44:39 +0200 From: Jaap Akkerhuis Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org The regulatory policy you describe is fundamentally contrary to that maintained by the U.S. in international forums over the past several years - which was re-emphasized several hours ago by an FCC official. The USGOV is not "stupid." It doesn't want to port 150 years of telecoms regulatory baggage to the Internet simply because someone wants to build a DNS namespace using telephone numbers. I just checked the charter of the IETF WG for enum. Non of your remarks borders on issues this WG and mailinglist is set up for. Whether the USGOV, the FCC etc. is stupid or not should somewhere else to be discussed/decided. Maybe it is time to start a ``enum-policy'' mailing list or something like that. jaap _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 15:04:04 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA20836 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:04:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA25978; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:56:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA25945 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:56:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20472 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:55:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA14898; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:55:05 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:36:28 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: "A.M. Rutkowski" , "John D. Goodspeed" , joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com, enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Message-ID: <2818368.998512588@localhost> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822135340.02858550@mail.netmagic.com> References: <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> <1413042.998489167@localhost> <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010822135340.02858550@mail.netmagic.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-22 14.09 -0400 "A.M. Rutkowski" wrote: >> ENUM can the way I see it only work if the handling of E.164 is in >> accordance with how the numbers really are used. Regardless of transport >> mechanism. If in some countries the users of the numbers feel they >> are too > > The regulatory policy you describe is fundamentally > contrary to that maintained by the U.S. in international > forums over the past several years - which was re-emphasized > several hours ago by an FCC official. > > The USGOV is not "stupid." It doesn't want to port 150 years > of telecoms regulatory baggage to the Internet simply because > someone wants to build a DNS namespace using telephone numbers. It was not my intention to say that we should inherit things just because. My point was that we should use E.164 numbers the same way regardless of transport. If ENUM becomes a tool to change the way we look at and use E.164 numbers, fine. There is though a difference between (a) having a system for E.164 numbers which is broken and then something which inherits it (ENUM) in a completely incompatible way (b) fixing the way we look at E.164 numbers, and inheriting the fixed system so we have a similar view at the numbers regardless of transport Just like the use and handling of E.164 numbers changed when competition was introduced on the local loop, when we got cellphones, sms messaging and god knows what -- we will see a change of E.164 number handling when ENUM is introduced. Actually, the issues with E.164 numbers and Internet is more a generic problem regarding the interest of getting E.164 numbers to customers which should be treated like local loop even though the "telco" is not connected to the SS7 network at all. It has not much to do with ENUM. It is a question on what kind of endpoint can get an E.164 number, when, from whom etc etc. Directory services, secret numbers, priority calls, wiretapping of phonecalls not made on the SS7 network etc. ENUM is just an addressing mechanism. Regardless of how ENUM is implemented in the end in a country, one have to work on all the issues above anyways. Like the issues which are discussed in the US at the moment with how to handle the local loop over cable TV networks, and not the copper which I think you refer to? A discussion where baby bells and others have completely different views (for obvious reasons). paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 15:04:29 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA20877 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:04:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA26085; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:56:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA26038 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:56:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20478 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:55:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id hlqnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:57:14 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822145240.02864690@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:56:46 -0400 To: Jaap Akkerhuis , enum@ietf.org From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= In-Reply-To: <200108221844.f7MIidg04543@bartok.sidn.nl> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_103102373==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_103102373==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hi Jaap, >else to be discussed/decided. Maybe it is time to start a >``enum-policy'' mailing list or something like that. It's worth noting that it was the co-chair that make these remarks. There are lots of ENUM policy lists. By the IESG failing to close down this Working Group, it has effectively ceded it to policy discussions, unless someone wants to purse an ENUM Lite work effort. --tony --=====================_103102373==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Hi Jaap,

else to be discussed/decided. Maybe it is time to start a
``enum-policy'' mailing list or something like that.

It's worth noting that it was the co-chair that make
these remarks.

There are lots of ENUM policy lists.  By the
IESG failing to close down this Working Group,
it has effectively ceded it to policy discussions,
unless someone wants to purse an ENUM Lite
work effort.

--tony --=====================_103102373==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 15:18:53 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21307 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:18:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA26810; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:11:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA26780 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:11:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bartok.sidn.nl (bartok.sidn.nl [193.176.144.164]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21072 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:09:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bartok.sidn.nl (localhost.sidn.nl [127.0.0.1]) by bartok.sidn.nl (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7MJAhg04689; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:10:43 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jaap@bartok.sidn.nl) Message-Id: <200108221910.f7MJAhg04689@bartok.sidn.nl> To: "A.M. Rutkowski" cc: enum@ietf.org, Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:56:46 -0400. <5.1.0.14.2.20010822145240.02864690@mail.netmagic.com> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:10:43 +0200 From: Jaap Akkerhuis Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Tony, Hi Jaap, >else to be discussed/decided. Maybe it is time to start a >``enum-policy'' mailing list or something like that. It's worth noting that it was the co-chair that make these remarks. For the record, I was quoting your mail as it arrived via the list (See citation below). There are lots of ENUM policy lists. It would be interesting to know on which lists and how to contribute. By the IESG failing to close down this Working Group, it has effectively ceded it to policy discussions, unless someone wants to purse an ENUM Lite work effort. This is quite a silly argument. That way you can also argue that the IESG ceded this list to discussions over hersey bars, viagra or worldpeace. jaap Return-Path: enum-admin@ietf.org Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by bureau.sidn.nl (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f7MIFgl13054 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:15:42 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from enum-admin@ietf.org) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA23841; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:09:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA23812 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:09:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA18822 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:08:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id pkqnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:09:42 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822135340.02858550@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:09:13 -0400 To: Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , "John D. Goodspeed" , joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com, enum@ietf.org From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: <2633352.998509505@localhost> References: <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> <1413042.998489167@localhost> <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_100249731==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org X-UIDL: 8117de02fd548b803aa2c42649e6b4ba --=====================_100249731==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Patrik, >It is extremely hard, and I would say stupid, to inherit something without >inheriting the whole thing. Bad things aswell as good things. > >ENUM can the way I see it only work if the handling of E.164 is in >accordance with how the numbers really are used. Regardless of transport >mechanism. If in some countries the users of the numbers feel they are too The regulatory policy you describe is fundamentally contrary to that maintained by the U.S. in international forums over the past several years - which was re-emphasized several hours ago by an FCC official. The USGOV is not "stupid." It doesn't want to port 150 years of telecoms regulatory baggage to the Internet simply because someone wants to build a DNS namespace using telephone numbers. --tony --=====================_100249731==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Patrik,

It is extremely hard, and I would say stupid, to inherit something without
inheriting the whole thing. Bad things aswell as good things.

ENUM can the way I see it only work if the handling of E.164 is in
accordance with how the numbers really are used. Regardless of transport
mechanism. If in some countries the users of the numbers feel they are too

The regulatory policy you describe is fundamentally
contrary to that maintained by the U.S. in international
forums over the past several years - which was re-emphasized
several hours ago by an FCC official.

The USGOV is not "stupid."  It doesn't want to port 150 years
of telecoms regulatory baggage to the Internet simply because
someone wants to build a DNS namespace using telephone numbers.

--tony --=====================_100249731==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 15:23:20 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21414 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:23:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA27102; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:15:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA27076 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:15:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21186 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:14:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id olqnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:15:59 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822150643.02856650@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:15:31 -0400 To: Richard Shockey , Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , "John D. Goodspeed" , joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com, enum@ietf.org From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822143823.0377aae0@127.0.0.1> References: <2633352.998509505@localhost> <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> <1413042.998489167@localhost> <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_104227330==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_104227330==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Richard, >If I'm correct in the ITU context telephone numbers are not "owned" as >such they are considered a "shared global resource" Though their may be >substantial "rights to use" as in the case of 800 numbers etc. However >those rights would terminate once service was terminated as well. Fortunately, this is not accurate. They are treated as national PSTN identifiers and dealt with in each jurisdiction pursuant to domestic law. The 55 year history with source citations is available at http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rutkowski-enum-basis-00.txt --tony --=====================_104227330==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Richard,

If I'm correct in the ITU context telephone numbers are not "owned" as such they are considered a "shared global resource" Though their may be substantial "rights to use" as in the case of 800 numbers etc. However those rights would terminate once service was terminated as well.

Fortunately, this is not accurate.  They are treated as
national PSTN identifiers and dealt with in each jurisdiction
pursuant to domestic law.

The 55 year history with source citations is available at
http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rutkowski-enum-basis-00.txt

--tony --=====================_104227330==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 15:26:02 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21474 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:25:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA27276; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:18:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA27247 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:18:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from friendly.realnames.com (friendly.realnames.com [63.251.238.102]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id PAA21261 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:16:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 24839 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 02:35:28 -0000 Received: from chubby.internal.realnames.com (HELO heaven.internal.realnames.com) (10.1.5.39) by friendly.realnames.com with SMTP; 23 Aug 2001 02:35:28 -0000 Received: From RINCON.INTERNAL.REALNAMES.COM (10.1.5.99[10.1.5.99 port:2605]) by heaven.internal.realnames.com Mail essentials (server 2.422) with SMTP id: <115865@heaven.internal.realnames.com> for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:15:23 PM -0700 smtpmailfrom Received: by rincon.centraal.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:17:13 -0700 Message-ID: From: Greg Slack To: enum@ietf.org Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:17:03 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C12B3F.0C0EAF2C" Subject: [Enum] UNSUBSCRIBE Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C12B3F.0C0EAF2C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" UNSUBSCRIBE -----Original Message----- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C12B3F.0C0EAF2C Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'>       &nbs= p;    = UNSUBSCRIBE

<= ![if = !supportEmptyParas]> 

=

-----Original Message-----

------_=_NextPart_001_01C12B3F.0C0EAF2C-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 15:32:19 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21606 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:32:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA27611; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:24:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA27578 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:24:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21407 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA19256; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:23:14 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:22:26 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: "A.M. Rutkowski" , Richard Shockey , "John D. Goodspeed" , joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com, enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Message-ID: <2983850.998515346@localhost> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822150643.02856650@mail.netmagic.com> References: <2633352.998509505@localhost> <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> <1413042.998489167@localhost> <07a901c12b2f$585d6ea0$0201a8c0@gambrills1.md.home.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010822150643.02856650@mail.netmagic.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-22 15.15 -0400 "A.M. Rutkowski" wrote: > Fortunately, this is not accurate. They are treated as > national PSTN identifiers and dealt with in each jurisdiction > pursuant to domestic law. ...and because of this I think each country is to treat these identifiers according to their law -- also when they are stored in DNS...and because of this it is the government of united kingdom which handles 44 and 4.4.e164.arpa. paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 15:39:58 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21945 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:39:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA28330; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:32:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA28295 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:32:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21577 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:30:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id OAA02883; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:32:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from unknown(209.173.49.244) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xma002878; Wed, 22 Aug 01 14:31:57 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822152107.0367a6b0@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:37:09 -0400 To: "A.M. Rutkowski" , Jaap Akkerhuis , enum@ietf.org From: Richard Shockey Cc: Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822145240.02864690@mail.netmagic.com> References: <200108221844.f7MIidg04543@bartok.sidn.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Enum] The ENUM WG and the use of this list.... Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 02:56 PM 8/22/2001 -0400, A.M. Rutkowski wrote: >Hi Jaap, > >>else to be discussed/decided. Maybe it is time to start a >>``enum-policy'' mailing list or something like that. > >It's worth noting that it was the co-chair that make >these remarks. > >There are lots of ENUM policy lists. So please take your opinions of US Government policy there. > By the >IESG failing to close down this Working Group, >it has effectively ceded it to policy discussions, >unless someone wants to purse an ENUM Lite >work effort. Ahh... I don't think so. The chairs of this WG (Patrik and myself) maintain control of this list and as such establish the guidelines for discussion in accordance with IETF procedures. The working group and this discussion list was kept open specifically to maintain lines of communication between the IETF ENUM working group members that developed 2916 and other technical communities that are developing implementations of 2916 or need technical clarifications on issues related to DNS etc. In fact this WG still has technical issues on the table which we may shortly take up in support of those other groups. The co-chairs have been in discussions with the Area Directors on what should be our scope of work moving forward and Patrik and I will have something to say about that in the near future. >--tony >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 16:09:23 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21417 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:23:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA27025; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:14:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA26995 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:14:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21151 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 15:13:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA17749; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:13:40 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:13:10 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: "A.M. Rutkowski" , Jaap Akkerhuis , enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Message-ID: <2950468.998514790@localhost> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-22 14.56 -0400 "A.M. Rutkowski" wrote: > By the > IESG failing to close down this Working Group, > it has effectively ceded it to policy discussions, > unless someone wants to purse an ENUM Lite > work effort. The chairs of this wg have chose to have the mailing list and wg alive as long as discussions go on in the ITU-T, i.e. even though RFC 2916 exists, we have agreed to have the wg alive so IETF have a forum to discuss eventual questions that might come from ITU-T. For example during the SG2 meeting in September. This was last time discussed with our Area Directors and representatives from ITU-T during the IETF in London. It is not uncommon for IETF to have at least mailing lists, if even working groups, stay for some time because of such liason issues. Further, it is because one of the co-chairs can end up in discussions like this we have two chairs of most wg's. So the other one can stop a discussion the first got involved in. I didn't sign the mail as co-chair, did I? (I do with this though) But, yes, because of the list exists, policy talk come up on the list. paf, co-chair of the working group _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 17:02:59 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA23971 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:02:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA01015; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:55:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA00988 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:55:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA23782 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:53:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA13631 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:54:42 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822135246.0398f540@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 13:54:46 -0700 To: enum@ietf.org From: Dave Crocker In-Reply-To: <1C1EEC765F843E44996971A80682118BBB8B63@opwinex01.corp.illu minet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Enum] ICANN history Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 09:05 AM 8/22/2001, Kevin McCandless wrote: >ICANN was developed solely to break up the Network Solutions monopoly hold >on multiple TLDS domains and to add competition in providing the TLDs. 1. You are confusing ICANN with the IAHC. 2. Myopic historical inaccuracies are neither productive nor relevant to this group. 3. This topic is entirely irrelevant to this technical discussion list. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 17:52:06 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24804 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:52:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA03209; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:44:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA03181 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:44:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.50]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24655 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:43:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from worldnet ([12.88.173.132]) by mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010822214358.IPRG28026.mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net@worldnet>; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 21:43:58 +0000 From: "Judith Oppenheimer" To: "'Richard Shockey'" , "'Jim Reid'" , "'Kevin McCandless'" Cc: "'Patrik Faltstrom'" , "'Pat Conley'" , "'Chip Sharp'" , "'Hollenbeck, Scott'" , Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:40:38 -0400 Message-ID: <044701c12b53$53238040$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822143331.0377d3e0@127.0.0.1> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > And as a personal note ..you are correct there is NO ICANN > involvement in ENUM Yet. If the FCC maintains a stance that VOIP is off bounds even in the context of enforcing its own telephone numbering and service regulations, who do you think will step in? With rings on their fingers and bells on their toes? _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 18:51:34 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA25753 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:51:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA04607; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:42:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA04527 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:42:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pine.neustar.com (pine.neustar.com [209.173.57.70]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA25616 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:41:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from chi02.npac.com (dmz1.il.neustar.com [209.173.57.65]) by pine.neustar.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f7MMgNt15739; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:42:23 -0500 Received: by chi02.chicago.npac.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:39:07 -0500 Message-ID: <23309E398D84D5119D0F00306E0751390FB982@dc02.npac.com> From: "Gallant, Andy" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=27Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m=27?= , enum@ietf.org Subject: FYI - RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:41:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id SAA04528 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Patrik, FYI - Here are some excerpts from actual primary sources (ITU-T Recommendations) that could help clarify some of the discussion in this thread. In my opinion, they support your comments about E.164 numbering and about respective roles for the provision of RFC 2916 ENUM. I hope you find them useful. Regards, and my apologies in advance about text wrapping and line length, -Andy **** ****Excerpts A: From ITU-T Recommendation E.190 - Principles And Responsibilities For The Management, Assignment And Reclamation Of E-Series International Numbering Resources (Geneva, 1997) 6.2.2 Principle 2: Numbering resources are assigned to facilitate the provisioning of public telecommunications services [...] 6.2.5 Principle 5: Assignment confers use of the resource but does not imply ownership by the assignee [...] **** ****Excerpts B: From: ITU-T Recommendation E.164.1 - Criteria And Procedures For The Reservation, Assignment, And Reclamation Of E.164 Country Codes And Associated Identification Codes (ICs) (Geneva, 1998) 1 Introduction Recommendation E.164 describes the international public telecommunication numbering plan. Recommendation E.190 describes the general principles to be utilized in the assignment of ITU-T E-Series international numbering resources. [...] The TSB assigns and reclaims E.164 country codes for geographic areas, global services and for Networks. It is also responsible for the assignment and reclamation of Identification Codes (ICs) for Networks [footnote 1]. The assignment of subsequent digits are normally not the purview of the ITU-T, but are the purview of the assignee. However, there may be unique circumstances by which it is jointly agreed by the TSB and the appropriate ITU-T Study Group that subsequent digits are to be centrally administered, e.g. UIFNs. 5 General section 5.11 All numbering resources that are assigned will be in conformance with the format and function of Recommendation E.164, and with the principles in Recommendation E.190. **** ****Excerpts C: From ITU-T Recommendation E.164 - The International Public Telecommunication Numbering Plan (revised in 1997) 4 Definitions Within the integrated service environment, the terms used for all networks and services must be compatible and consistent. This Recommendation defines the following terms. 4.1 number F: numéro S: número A string of decimal digits that uniquely indicates the public network termination point. The number contains the information necessary to route the call to this termination point. A number can be in a format determined nationally or in an international format. The international format is known as the International Public Telecommunication Number which includes the country code and subsequent digits, but not the international prefix. 4.2 numbering plan F: plan de numérotage S: plan de numeración A numbering plan specifies the format and structure of the numbers used within that plan. It typically consists of decimal digits segmented into groups in order to identify specific elements used for identification, routing and charging capabilities, e.g. within E.164 to identify countries, national destinations, and subscribers. A numbering plan does not include prefixes, suffixes, and additional information required to complete a call. The national [footnote 2] numbering plan is the national implementation of the E.164 numbering plan. 4.7 country code (CC) for geographic areas F: indicatif de pays pour zones géographiques S: indicativo de país para áreas geográficas The combination of one, two or three digits identifying a specific country, countries in an integrated numbering plan, or a specific geographic area. 4.8 national (significant) number [N(S)N] F: numéro national (significatif) [N(S)N] S: número nacional (significativo) [N(S)N] That portion of the number that follows the country code for geographic areas. The national (significant) number consists of the National Destination Code (NDC) followed by the Subscriber Number (SN). The function and format of the N(S)N is nationally determined. 4.9 national destination code (NDC) F: indicatif national de destination (NDC) S: indicativo nacional de destino (NDC) A nationally optional code field, within the E.164 number plan, which combined with the Subscriber's Number (SN) will constitute the national (significant) number of the international public telecommunication number for geographic areas. The NDC will have a network and/or trunk code selection function. The NDC can be a decimal digit or a combination of decimal digits (not including any prefix) identifying a numbering area within a country (or group of countries included in one integrated numbering plan or a specific geographic area) and/or network/services. 4.13 country code (CC) for global services F: indicatif de pays pour les services mondiaux S: indicativo de país para servicios mundiales A 3-digit Country Code used to identify the global service. 4.14 global service F: service mondial S: servicio mundial A service defined by the ITU-T, provisioned on the public switched network, to which the ITU-T has assigned a specific country code to enable the provision of that international service between two or more countries and/or integrated numbering plans. **** ****end of excerpts Andrew Gallant NeuStar, Inc. 1120 Vermont Avenue NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 USA Tel: +1 202 533 2812 Fax: +1 202 533 2987 Email: andrew.gallant@neustar.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrik Fältström [mailto:paf@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 3:22 PM > To: A.M. Rutkowski; Richard Shockey; John D. Goodspeed; > joppenheimer@icbtollfree.com; enum@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > --On 01-08-22 15.15 -0400 "A.M. Rutkowski" wrote: > > > Fortunately, this is not accurate. They are treated as > > national PSTN identifiers and dealt with in each jurisdiction > > pursuant to domestic law. > > ...and because of this I think each country is to treat these > identifiers > according to their law -- also when they are stored in > DNS...and because of > this it is the government of united kingdom which handles 44 and > 4.4.e164.arpa. > > paf > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 19:46:53 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA26537 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:46:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA06135; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:39:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA06094 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:39:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shell.nominum.com (shell.nominum.com [128.177.192.160]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA26366 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:36:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shell.nominum.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by shell.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A20433190C; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:37:43 -0700 (PDT) To: "Judith Oppenheimer" Cc: enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: Message from "Judith Oppenheimer" of "Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:40:38 EDT." <044701c12b53$53238040$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 16:37:43 -0700 Message-ID: <6840.998523463@shell.nominum.com> From: Jim Reid Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org >>>>> "Judith" == Judith Oppenheimer writes: >> And as a personal note ..you are correct there is NO ICANN >> involvement in ENUM Judith> Yet. And the little green aliens from Tharg haven't invaded Earth. Yet. Judith> If the FCC maintains a stance that VOIP is off bounds even Judith> in the context of enforcing its own telephone numbering Judith> and service regulations, who do you think will step in? Judith> With rings on their fingers and bells on their toes? Elvis? The Illuminati? These are more credible candidates than ICANN. ICANN has the same responsibility and authority for VoIP or ENUM as it has for any other internet protocol, like SMTP or HTTP: exactly zero. ENUM is an activity for the IETF, IAB and ITU. ICANN has no input. In fact if ICANN were to get involved it would probably be a breach of its charter. And it's also hard to see what that involvement could possibly be. ITU drives the E.164 numbering plan. That isn't going to change without a new treaty that gets signed off by every ITU member and telco. The ENUM protocols are driven by IETF and IAB. That isn't going to change either. Therefore there is no role for ICANN to fill even if it wanted to or could, which it can't. Not that I can speak for ICANN or any of these other organisations. Oh and ENUM encompasses far more than just VoIP. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 19:56:44 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA26665 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:56:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA06377; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:48:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA06347 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:48:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA26548 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:47:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [63.221.166.163] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id ooqnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:48:39 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822194117.02a86560@exchange.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@exchange.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:48:11 -0400 To: "Gallant, Andy" , "'Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m=27?=" , enum@ietf.org From: "A.M.Rutkowski" Subject: Re: FYI - RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: <23309E398D84D5119D0F00306E0751390FB982@dc02.npac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Hi Andy, >In my opinion, they support your comments about >E.164 numbering and about respective roles for >the provision of RFC 2916 ENUM. You might want to reference the ITU Constitution to better understand the role of the ITU vis-a-vis its Member States, as well as the force and effect of ITU-T Recommendations. This is particularly relevant for Administrations such as the USA which does not accord Recommendations any force and effect under international law. On this, Patrik was accurate in his statement that the matter is wholly within the prerogative of Member States within their respective jurisdictions. Of course, outside their jurisdictions, they have little or no powers. This is one of many reasons why private commercial ENUM implementations are inherently more useful. --tony _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 20:34:35 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA27067 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:34:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA07658; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:26:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA07625 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:26:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA26974 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:25:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA20752; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:26:17 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822172404.0397d558@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 17:26:33 -0700 To: "A.M.Rutkowski" From: Dave Crocker Subject: Re: FYI - RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: enum@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822194117.02a86560@exchange.netmagic.com> References: <23309E398D84D5119D0F00306E0751390FB982@dc02.npac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Hi, Tony, At 04:48 PM 8/22/2001, A.M.Rutkowski wrote: >Hi Andy, > >>In my opinion, they support your comments about >>E.164 numbering and about respective roles for >>the provision of RFC 2916 ENUM. > >You might want to reference the ITU Constitution to better >understand the role of the ITU vis-a-vis its Member States, >as well as the force and effect of ITU-T Recommendations. >This is particularly relevant for Administrations such >as the USA which does not accord Recommendations any force >and effect under international law. You might want to consult the IETF Standards Process RFC and the RFC on Working Group Guidelines, to better understand the role of a constructive contributor to IETF discussions. This is particularly relevant for contributors who are unwilling to focus on technical matters. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 20:41:36 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA27158 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:41:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA08166; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:34:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA08139 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:34:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.48]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA27054 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:32:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from worldnet ([12.88.173.132]) by mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010823003333.NUVE12058.mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net@worldnet>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:33:33 +0000 From: "Judith Oppenheimer" To: "'Jim Reid'" Cc: Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:31:40 -0400 Message-ID: <044c01c12b6b$03e1a8a0$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: <6840.998523463@shell.nominum.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Elvis? The Illuminati? These are more credible candidates than ICANN. > > ICANN has the same responsibility and authority for VoIP or ENUM as it > has for any other internet protocol, like SMTP or HTTP: exactly > zero. ENUM is an activity for the IETF, IAB and ITU. ICANN has no > input. In fact if ICANN were to get involved it would probably be a > breach of its charter. And it's also hard to see what that involvement > could possibly be. ITU drives the E.164 numbering plan. That isn't > going to change without a new treaty that gets signed off by every ITU > member and telco. The ENUM protocols are driven by IETF and IAB. That > isn't going to change either. Therefore there is no role for ICANN to > fill even if it wanted to or could, which it can't. Not that I can > speak for ICANN or any of these other organisations. > > Oh and ENUM encompasses far more than just VoIP. > I couldn't agree with you more, though I'd hardly consider the IAB unrelated to ICANN. But ICANN may see otherwise. http://www.icann.org/melbourne/info-verisign-revisions.htm FAQ #19 ... In the case of the VeriSign/Telcordia ENUM World initiative, VeriSign is offering registration services within .com at a lower-than-second level. The current NSI Registry Agreement is mostly limited to registration activities at the second level. VeriSign has used this feature to initiate a "trial" that it notes "operat[es] on the DNS infrastructure, owned and managed by VeriSign," that "will enable rapid resolution of number-to-address mapping" and that "uniquely position[s]" VeriSign to "play a critical role in future ENUM-based services." ICANN management believes that, when a registry operator seeks to provide services by leveraging the "DNS infrastructure" that it exclusively operates under its registry agreement with ICANN, those services should be subject to technical requirements and other policies developed through the ICANN process. Concerns have been voiced that the ENUM World initiative, depending on how it develops, may impair a sound technical enum implementation based on open and non-proprietary standards. To address concerns of this type, the new unsponsored TLD Registry Agreement covers registry services provided by the registry operator concerning "Registered Names," whether they are at the second or a lower level. ... There are other indications of ICANN intent as well that I can forward you if you're interested. Judith _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 22 23:10:09 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA00981 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:10:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA12552; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:01:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA12521 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:01:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from maynard.mail.mindspring.net (maynard.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.243]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA00881 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:00:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rds.ix.netcom.com (user-2ivemm8.dialup.mindspring.com [165.247.90.200]) by maynard.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA05835; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:01:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822224944.02c16b30@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: rshockey/popd.ix.netcom.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:06:40 -0400 To: "Judith Oppenheimer" , "'Jim Reid'" From: Richard Shockey Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: In-Reply-To: <044c01c12b6b$03e1a8a0$94ac580c@att.net.icbtollfree.com> References: <6840.998523463@shell.nominum.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org > >There are other indications of ICANN intent as well that I can forward you >if you're interested. > >Judith Ladies and Gentlemen is'nt there a fine list some where on the planet where conspiracy theories surrounding ICANN and comical and technically absurd concepts of multiple private instantiations of ENUM roots might be more appropriate ? This thread began with a modest note of complement to Scott Hollenbeck on a interesting and complimentary technical draft on how 2916 might be used by various entities involved in the ENUM provisioning process private or public ...would someone care to comment on _its_ merits and applicability to the upcoming task at hand? I believe that I speak for my co-chair that we do not want this list to get out of hand ... we have admin authority over the listserver and in appropriate cases we might use it. >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 00:57:14 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA02222 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:57:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA15039; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:46:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA15008 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:46:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hclinfinet.com ([203.90.66.76]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA02144 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:45:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 19970 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 05:09:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO HPSERVER.justvox.com) ([203.90.94.21]) (envelope-sender ) by mailbx1.hclinfinet.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 23 Aug 2001 05:09:15 -0000 Received: by HPSERVER.justvox.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:20:52 +0530 Message-ID: <55E7C225B237454881D10CB1F16799BA35BB@HPSERVER.justvox.com> From: Sameer Sheth To: enum@ietf.org Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:20:50 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3) Content-Type: text/plain Subject: [Enum] (no subject) Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Remove me from the list please Thank you Sameer.Sheth Email Disclaimer The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 02:14:26 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA18621 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 02:14:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA25299; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:57:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA25268 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:57:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from brahma.roc.com ([202.56.196.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA08746 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 01:55:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from asr (machine128.roc.com [172.16.1.128]) by brahma.roc.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA12907 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:17:30 +0530 From: "A.S.Rajendran" To: Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:16:16 +0530 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Enum] unsuscribe Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit unsuscribe -----Original Message----- From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Zappacosta Rolando Jorge Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 6:35 PM To: enum@ietf.org Subject: [Enum] unsuscribe unsuscribe _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 09:57:58 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA23559 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:57:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA05549; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:47:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA05518 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:47:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.163.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA23434 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:46:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-av-2.cisco.com (sj-msg-av-2.cisco.com [171.69.24.12]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.11.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id f7NDl2Q25769 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 06:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sj-msg-av-2.cisco.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7NDl2l05698 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 06:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CHSHARP-W2K1.cisco.com (rtp-vpn-108.cisco.com [10.82.192.108]) by mailman.cisco.com (8.9.3/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id GAA13969 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 06:47:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010823093711.01c72c48@dogwood.cisco.com> X-Sender: chsharp@dogwood.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 09:46:34 -0400 To: enum@ietf.org From: Chip Sharp In-Reply-To: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84C2@vsvapostal3.prod.ne tsol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Enum] epp-e164 & naptr objects Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Warning - the following is allegedly a technical question. :-) Can the information required to be entered into DNS for RFC2916 be adequately dealt with (in EPP) by defining a and/or object? What other information is needed? Specific examples and proposals would be appreciated. I understand that EPP is being dealt with in provreg. I'd like to understand what additions to their work are needed for support of RFC2916. Thanks, Chip _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 10:27:27 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA24224 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:27:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA06758; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:13:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA06725 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:13:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heron.verisign.com (heron.verisign.com [216.168.233.95]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23834 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:11:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from VSVAPOSTALGW1.prod.netsol.com (vsvapostalgw1.prod.netsol.com [216.168.234.201]) by heron.verisign.com (nsi_0.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA24884; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:12:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by VSVAPOSTALGW1.prod.netsol.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:12:14 -0400 Message-ID: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84EB@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com> From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" To: "'Chip Sharp'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] epp-e164 & naptr objects Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:06:48 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org >-----Original Message----- >From: Chip Sharp [mailto:chsharp@cisco.com] >Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:47 AM >To: enum@ietf.org >Subject: [Enum] epp-e164 & naptr objects > > >Warning - the following is allegedly a technical question. :-) > >Can the information required to be entered into DNS for RFC2916 be >adequately dealt with (in EPP) by defining a and/or > object? > >What other information is needed? Specific examples and proposals would be >appreciated. It's certainly possible to define object extensions for NAPTR record provisioning; the extension mechanism might actually be easier and more intuitively obvious than defining a new object type as currently described in epp-e164-00. That can be fixed with a rewrite. It's also possible to define extensions to provision other RRs if it makes sense to do so. I don't believe anything other than the fields described in 2916 are needed unless some non-DNS data is also required somewhere. If that's the case, I'm also open to suggestions. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 12:27:53 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26916 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:27:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA12329; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:13:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA12300 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:13:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26654 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:11:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id LAA04342; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:13:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: from unknown(209.173.49.244) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xma004340; Thu, 23 Aug 01 11:12:49 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010823111412.03511a20@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:18:03 -0400 To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" , "'Chip Sharp'" , enum@ietf.org From: Richard Shockey Subject: RE: [Enum] epp-e164 & naptr objects In-Reply-To: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84EB@vsvapostal3.prod.ne tsol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 10:06 AM 8/23/2001 -0400, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Chip Sharp [mailto:chsharp@cisco.com] > >Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:47 AM > >To: enum@ietf.org > >Subject: [Enum] epp-e164 & naptr objects > > > > > >Warning - the following is allegedly a technical question. :-) Ahhh..at last ! > > > >Can the information required to be entered into DNS for RFC2916 be > >adequately dealt with (in EPP) by defining a and/or > > object? > > > >What other information is needed? Specific examples and proposals would be > > >appreciated. > >It's certainly possible to define object extensions for NAPTR record >provisioning; the extension mechanism might actually be easier and more >intuitively obvious than defining a new object type as currently described >in epp-e164-00. That can be fixed with a rewrite. It's also possible to >define extensions to provision other RRs if it makes sense to do so. I certainly agree ... this was the whole purpose of the provreg work group. That is what the E in EPP meant or the X in XRP, a complimentary proposal submitted to the provreg WG by some of my colleagues at NeuStar. Extensibility is the key. Though it was self-evident to some of us that the provreg work could be used by other applications that require provisioning models, IP number administration and ENUM were mentioned in the WG early on, the provreg WG needed to deal with the central problem of TLD administration first since there were political requirements coming from ICANN that required that application come first. >I don't believe anything other than the fields described in 2916 are needed >unless some non-DNS data is also required somewhere. If that's the case, >I'm also open to suggestions. Well this is where it can get interesting. Since the administration of 2916 falls completely outside the procedures outlined by ICANN for TLD's it will be up to the relevant national administrations (Tier 1) to develop appropriate requiments for data objects. I'm pretty convinced that there will be additional requirements for data to be passed between ENUM Registrars and ENUM Registries. For instance CIC codes? PSTN Service provider of record? I can certainly think of others. This may vary between country to country. Though there is no requirement for WHOIS to be exposed as part of a ENUM registration, again this is not ICANN, ENUM Registries may be required to maintain a "fat registry" of data beyond simple NS, or NAPTR records, Admin contact and Technical contact. What data they may be required to maintain could be a topic of discussion at groups such as the emerging US ENUM Forum. I'm confident though that the EPP/XRP protocol will have sufficient tools to do the job no matter what the requirements are. www.enumf.org > > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 12:28:12 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26929 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:28:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA12571; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:18:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA12538 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:18:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.47]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26762 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:17:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from z000679 ([12.77.125.46]) by mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010823161755.WNYF8481.mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net@z000679>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:17:55 +0000 Reply-To: From: "Mark Harris" To: "Richard Shockey" Cc: Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:27:40 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822224944.02c16b30@127.0.0.1> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Richard: If you haven't noticed, we (others, myself and IITO), have tried to keep our discussions of other Enum trees (the Golden Forest) out of this discussion list. We have done because of your general bias to the concept. However, I just have to reply to your comment... "technically absurd concepts of multiple private instantiations of ENUM roots" I have a few question... What is your definition of technically absurd? What is your definition of private? Is the IETF and ISOC a private organization or a public one? Do not already, multiple private instantiations of ENUM roots exist? (e164.com, etc.) Doesn't your company, Neustar, run it's own private instantiation of an Enum Root at Enum.org? Is enum.org public or private? Is enum.org technically absurd? I am sorry that you have such a narrow view of "Telephone Number Mapping". Also, because RFC2916 has included in it, e164.arpa, as the preferred domain for Enum, there are inherent (and intertwined) technical and policy issues to take into consideration. IETF issues, ITU issues, Member-State Issues, Provider issues (including ITU sector-members), IAB issues, etc. (shall I say, ICANN issues) Maybe your right, maybe policy has been talked about too much. Maybe the problem is the inclusion of "POLICY" in RFC2916 of mandating specific parties (namely all those entities mentioned above) into a technical protocol. If the ENUM protocol in RFC2916, did not include the POLICY pre-supposition of e164.arpa (as an exclusive Enum tree), then many, if not most of these discussions, would not be here? I Hope that this is helpful in your quest to remove policy discussions from this list. Regards, Mark PS If anyone would like to help Richard and Patrik, a number of Enum discussion lists are being created at www.EnumForums.org in September to address many of the real world issues needed to make the Enum protocol happen. Just email your request to mailto:discuss@EnumForums.org -----Original Message----- From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Richard Shockey Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:07 PM To: Judith Oppenheimer; 'Jim Reid' Cc: enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > >There are other indications of ICANN intent as well that I can forward you >if you're interested. > >Judith Ladies and Gentlemen isn't there a fine list some where on the planet where conspiracy theories surrounding ICANN and comical and technically absurd concepts of multiple private instantiations of ENUM roots might be more appropriate ? This thread began with a modest note of complement to Scott Hollenbeck on a interesting and complimentary technical draft on how 2916 might be used by various entities involved in the ENUM provisioning process private or public ...would someone care to comment on _its_ merits and applicability to the upcoming task at hand? I believe that I speak for my co-chair that we do not want this list to get out of hand ... we have admin authority over the listserver and in appropriate cases we might use it. >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 13:11:57 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27482 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:11:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA13715; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:57:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA13684 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:57:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA27244 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:56:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA13185; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:57:14 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:45:10 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: "Hollenbeck, Scott" , "'Chip Sharp'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] epp-e164 & naptr objects Message-ID: <1918241.998592310@localhost> In-Reply-To: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84EB@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com> References: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84EB@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol. com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-23 10.06 -0400 "Hollenbeck, Scott" wrote: > I don't believe anything other than the fields described in 2916 are > needed unless some non-DNS data is also required somewhere. If that's > the case, I'm also open to suggestions. Maybe you need (new) error codes if the registry is to verify the regular expressions, so the "set" of NAPTR resource records which are provisioned "makes sense"? paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 13:24:26 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27621 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:24:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA14189; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:12:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA14158 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:12:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27472 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:11:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA18034; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:12:35 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010823100642.02336810@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:12:56 -0700 To: From: Dave Crocker Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822224944.02c16b30@127.0.0.1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 09:27 AM 8/23/2001, Mark Harris wrote: >I have a few question... Unfortunately, none of them are relevant to the process of defining the ENUM technical specification. Hence your questions need to find another forum. >Is the IETF and ISOC a private organization or a public one? There is plenty of documentation about the IETF and ISOC. Feel free to review it. >Do not already, multiple private instantiations of ENUM roots exist? >(e164.com, etc.) And plenty of alternate DNS roots. Mere existence does not make a think reasonable. At any rate, this group is focused on a DNS-based telephone number mapping service that is a formal extension to the global telephone service. The other activities are not. > IETF issues, ITU issues, Member-State Issues, >Provider issues (including ITU sector-members), IAB issues, etc. (shall I >say, ICANN issues) You are making a basic logic error: A participating in B does not mean that all things pertaining to A pertain to B. In other words, none of this has anything to do with ICANN. None of it. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 13:42:31 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27931 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:42:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA14782; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:31:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA14753 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:31:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA27765 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:29:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id MAA04430; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:31:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: from unknown(209.173.49.244) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xma004428; Thu, 23 Aug 01 12:30:52 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010823131525.02c4f140@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:18:03 -0400 To: Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , "Hollenbeck, Scott" , "'Chip Sharp'" , enum@ietf.org From: Richard Shockey Subject: RE: [Enum] epp-e164 & naptr objects In-Reply-To: <1918241.998592310@localhost> References: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84EB@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com> <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84EB@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol. com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id NAA14754 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit At 06:45 PM 8/23/2001 +0200, Patrik Fältström wrote: >--On 01-08-23 10.06 -0400 "Hollenbeck, Scott" >wrote: > > > I don't believe anything other than the fields described in 2916 are > > needed unless some non-DNS data is also required somewhere. If that's > > the case, I'm also open to suggestions. > >Maybe you need (new) error codes if the registry is to verify the regular >expressions, so the "set" of NAPTR resource records which are provisioned >"makes sense"? Are you suggesting that the registry perform a validation test on the NAPTR records before provisioning the DNS? Humm not a bad idea actually especially in light of Mike's clarification of how to write order and preference fields. > paf > > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 14:00:41 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28307 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:00:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA15204; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:53:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA15175 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:53:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.46]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28054 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:51:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from z000679 ([12.77.125.46]) by mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010823175226.WMMP1680.mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net@z000679>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:52:26 +0000 Reply-To: From: "Mark Harris" To: "Dave Crocker" Cc: Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:02:09 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010823100642.02336810@dcrocker.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Dave: To make you feel better, I give this quote, and will close the conversation... "Goods and Services are modularized and configured into systems, which require a multiplication and constant revision of standards. This leads to wars for control of the information on which standards are based." Quote from: PowerShift, by Alvin Toffler Regards, Mark PS Don't you work for Neustar as well? -----Original Message----- From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dhc@dcrocker.net] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:13 PM To: mjh@TheTrendWatchers.com Cc: enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt At 09:27 AM 8/23/2001, Mark Harris wrote: >I have a few question... Unfortunately, none of them are relevant to the process of defining the ENUM technical specification. Hence your questions need to find another forum. >Is the IETF and ISOC a private organization or a public one? There is plenty of documentation about the IETF and ISOC. Feel free to review it. >Do not already, multiple private instantiations of ENUM roots exist? >(e164.com, etc.) And plenty of alternate DNS roots. Mere existence does not make a think reasonable. At any rate, this group is focused on a DNS-based telephone number mapping service that is a formal extension to the global telephone service. The other activities are not. > IETF issues, ITU issues, Member-State Issues, >Provider issues (including ITU sector-members), IAB issues, etc. (shall I >say, ICANN issues) You are making a basic logic error: A participating in B does not mean that all things pertaining to A pertain to B. In other words, none of this has anything to do with ICANN. None of it. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Mark > Harris > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 12:28 PM > To: Richard Shockey > Cc: enum@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > Hi Richard: > > > If you haven't noticed, we (others, myself and IITO), have tried to keep our > discussions of other Enum trees (the Golden Forest) out of this discussion > list. We have done because of your general bias to the concept. > > However, I just have to reply to your comment... > "technically absurd concepts of multiple private instantiations of ENUM > roots" > > I have a few question... > > What is your definition of technically absurd? > > What is your definition of private? > > Is the IETF and ISOC a private organization or a public one? > > Do not already, multiple private instantiations of ENUM roots exist? > (e164.com, etc.) > > Doesn't your company, Neustar, run it's own private instantiation of an Enum > Root at Enum.org? > > Is enum.org public or private? > > Is enum.org technically absurd? > > > I am sorry that you have such a narrow view of "Telephone Number Mapping". > Also, because RFC2916 has included in it, e164.arpa, as the preferred domain > for Enum, there are inherent (and intertwined) technical and policy issues > to take into consideration. IETF issues, ITU issues, Member-State Issues, > Provider issues (including ITU sector-members), IAB issues, etc. (shall I > say, ICANN issues) > > Maybe your right, maybe policy has been talked about too much. Maybe the > problem is the inclusion of "POLICY" in RFC2916 of mandating specific > parties (namely all those entities mentioned above) into a technical > protocol. If the ENUM protocol in RFC2916, did not include the POLICY > pre-supposition of e164.arpa (as an exclusive Enum tree), then many, if not > most of these discussions, would not be here? > > I Hope that this is helpful in your quest to remove policy discussions from > this list. > > Regards, > Mark > > PS If anyone would like to help Richard and Patrik, a number of Enum > discussion lists are being created at www.EnumForums.org in September to > address many of the real world issues needed to make the Enum protocol > happen. Just email your request to mailto:discuss@EnumForums.org > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of > Richard Shockey > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:07 PM > To: Judith Oppenheimer; 'Jim Reid' > Cc: enum@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > > > > > >There are other indications of ICANN intent as well that I can forward you > >if you're interested. > > > >Judith > > Ladies and Gentlemen isn't there a fine list some where on the > planet where conspiracy theories surrounding ICANN and comical and > technically absurd concepts of multiple private instantiations of ENUM > roots might be more appropriate ? > > This thread began with a modest note of complement to Scott Hollenbeck on a > interesting and complimentary technical draft on how 2916 might be used by > various entities involved in the ENUM provisioning process private or > public ...would someone care to comment on _its_ merits and applicability > to the upcoming task at hand? > > I believe that I speak for my co-chair that we do not want this list to get > out of hand ... we have admin authority over the listserver and in > appropriate cases we might use it. > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >enum mailing list > >enum@ietf.org > >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives > NeuStar Inc. > 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 > 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 > Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 > or > > > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 14:28:24 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28724 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:28:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA16208; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:16:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA16124 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:16:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joy.songbird.com (IDENT:root@songbird.com [208.184.79.7]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28597 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:15:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bbthead.dcrocker.net (c1193160-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com [65.0.152.112]) by joy.songbird.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA20207; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:16:13 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010823110241.0363e6a8@dcrocker.net> X-Sender: dhc@brandenburg.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:16:39 -0700 To: From: Dave Crocker Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010823100642.02336810@dcrocker.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 11:02 AM 8/23/2001, Mark Harris wrote: >To make you feel better, I give this quote, and will close the conversation... feel better? given that the note had nothing to do with the discussion of technical merit, I'm afraid that it had no impact on my feelings, and even less impact on resolving the debate. >PS Don't you work for Neustar as well? They are one of my clients, yes. And I also one participated in the design of BXXP (pre-IETF BEEP), having focused primarily on design of the multiplexing mechanism. For reference, however, IETF work is supposed to be by individuals, rather than companies, and based on technical merit. Depending on one's perspective, this can be viewed idealistically as an assumption that everyone wants a good standard, or else cynically on the assumption that everyone is biased, so that detailing the reasons for a particular person's bias is not overly helpful. In general, IETF discussions limit ad hominems to questions of personality and genetics, rather than work affiliation... d/ ---------- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 14:52:03 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA29190 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:52:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA16966; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:40:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA16935 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:40:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nic-naa.net (216-220-241-232.midmaine.com [216.220.241.232]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA28919 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:39:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nic-naa.net (localhost.nic-naa.net [127.0.0.1]) by nic-naa.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f7NIc8N37028; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:38:08 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from brunner@nic-naa.net) Message-Id: <200108231838.f7NIc8N37028@nic-naa.net> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96 To: mark.harris@iito.org cc: enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:02:09 EDT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:38:08 -0400 From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org I think we may need to modify Godwin's law for this list. Citing Toffler, ICANN, black helicopters, or Allied Pipe. I am employed by NeuStar. Eric _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 15:24:25 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA29775 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:24:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA18293; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:16:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA18263 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:16:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA29629 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:15:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA06194; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 21:15:41 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 20:49:07 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Richard Shockey , "Hollenbeck, Scott" , "'Chip Sharp'" , enum@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Enum] epp-e164 & naptr objects Message-ID: <2364524.998599747@localhost> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010823131525.02c4f140@127.0.0.1> References: <3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84EB@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.c om><3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD60B84EB@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol. com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010823131525.02c4f140@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0b3 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 01-08-23 13.18 -0400 Richard Shockey wrote: >> Maybe you need (new) error codes if the registry is to verify the regular >> expressions, so the "set" of NAPTR resource records which are provisioned >> "makes sense"? > > Are you suggesting that the registry perform a validation test on the > NAPTR records before provisioning the DNS? > > Humm not a bad idea actually especially in light of Mike's clarification > of how to write order and preference fields. If you have a registry which have more policy on what is actually assigned than today's .com, the question is whether the registry should not do any verification of the data at all? Maybe not? I don't know. I just thought some mechanical verification, if possible, is a possibility on the registry side of the registration process. I am not saying it should be done. I just want to give some degree of freedom to the one which decides what the registry and registrar is to do. paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 15:51:03 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA00216 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:50:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA19292; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:39:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA19263 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:39:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.50]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA29991 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:38:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from z000679 ([12.77.125.46]) by mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010823193927.YNIW28026.mtiwmhc25.worldnet.att.net@z000679>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 19:39:27 +0000 Reply-To: From: "Mark Harris" To: "Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine" Cc: Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:49:11 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200108231838.f7NIc8N37028@nic-naa.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Eric: The good news is that, you Eric, "being on the inside", don't have to worry about getting censored or kicked off the list for your "non-technical" remarks. :-) Regards, Mark -----Original Message----- From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:38 PM To: mark.harris@iito.org Cc: enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt I think we may need to modify Godwin's law for this list. Citing Toffler, ICANN, black helicopters, or Allied Pipe. I am employed by NeuStar. Eric _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 16:16:59 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA00725 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:16:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA20473; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:09:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA20442 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:09:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dnspri.npac.com (dnspri.npac.com [208.143.33.66]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA00478 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:07:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dnspri.npac.com; id PAA04602; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:09:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from unknown(209.173.49.244) by dnspri.npac.com via smap (V5.0) id xma004599; Thu, 23 Aug 01 15:08:27 -0500 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010823160242.02e5aa90@127.0.0.1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:10:59 -0400 To: , "Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine" From: Richard Shockey Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Cc: In-Reply-To: References: <200108231838.f7NIc8N37028@nic-naa.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org At 03:49 PM 8/23/2001 -0400, Mark Harris wrote: >Hi Eric: > >The good news is that, you Eric, "being on the inside", don't have to worry >about getting censored or kicked off the list for your "non-technical" >remarks. :-) > >Regards, >Mark Eric and others were privately warned ...but I'm publicly warning you ... we are not engaging in censorship only attempting to keep the discussion here focused on the technical tasks at hand. We were lenient about discussion on this list so long as there were no other public forums available for policy and political issues surrounding 2916 but since those forums exist ..those discussions are more appropriate there. If you have a useful technical contribution to make here you are always welcome to do so here .. if you wish to discuss your theories of ENUM policy and US administration of ENUM take them elsewhere. >-----Original Message----- >From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Eric >Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine >Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:38 PM >To: mark.harris@iito.org >Cc: enum@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > >I think we may need to modify Godwin's law for this list. >Citing Toffler, ICANN, black helicopters, or Allied Pipe. > >I am employed by NeuStar. >Eric > > > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 23 16:54:14 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01488 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:54:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA22079; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:42:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA21996 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:42:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.49]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01286 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:41:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from z000679 ([12.77.125.46]) by mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010823204222.CWJI21828.mtiwmhc24.worldnet.att.net@z000679>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 20:42:22 +0000 Reply-To: From: "Mark Harris" To: "Richard Shockey" Cc: Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 16:52:07 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010823160242.02e5aa90@127.0.0.1> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Richard, No problem; I am sorry that my replies to the discussions on this list have made you so upset. I appreciate the public warning; as I am sure Eric appreciates the private one. Silently yours, Mark -----Original Message----- From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Richard Shockey Eric and others were privately warned ...but I'm publicly warning you ... we are not engaging in censorship only attempting to keep the discussion here focused on the technical tasks at hand. We were lenient about discussion on this list so long as there were no other public forums available for policy and political issues surrounding 2916 but since those forums exist ..those discussions are more appropriate there. If you have a useful technical contribution to make here you are always welcome to do so here .. if you wish to discuss your theories of ENUM policy and US administration of ENUM take them elsewhere. >-----Original Message----- >From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Eric >Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine >Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:38 PM >To: mark.harris@iito.org >Cc: enum@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt > > >I think we may need to modify Godwin's law for this list. >Citing Toffler, ICANN, black helicopters, or Allied Pipe. > >I am employed by NeuStar. >Eric > > > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum > > >_______________________________________________ >enum mailing list >enum@ietf.org >http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 45980 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 8 Sterling, VA 20166 1120 Vermont Ave NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20005 Voice 571.434.5651 Cell : 314.503.0640, Fax: 815.333.1237 or <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Mon Aug 27 07:38:57 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA11777 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 07:38:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA16224; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 07:26:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA16193 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 07:26:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from twnic.net.tw (twnic.net.tw [211.72.210.250]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA11194 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 07:24:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from abel (pc072.twnic.net.tw [211.72.211.72]) by twnic.net.tw (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA19668 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:26:01 +0800 Message-ID: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel> From: "abel" To: Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 19:29:11 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_04C3_01C12F2E.8C909050" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Subject: [Enum] Enum Resolver Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_04C3_01C12F2E.8C909050 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="big5" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi everybody: I am programming ENUM resolver with linux , but think a PROBLEM = ( maybe not) . _________________________________________________________________________= _______ $TTL 86400 @ 86400 IN SOA pc071.twnic.net.tw. = abel.pc071.twnic.net.tw. ( 200105264 14400 3600 3600000 172800 ) IN NS pc071.twnic.net.tw. IN NS NS.RIPE.NET. $ORIGIN 1.4.3.2.2.6.8.8.e164.arpa. 0.0.3.3 60 IN NAPTR 100 1 "u" "SIP+E2U" = "!^.*$!sip:abelyang@twnic.net.tw!" . 0.0.3.3 60 IN NAPTR 100 2 "u" "SMTP+E2U" = "!^.*$!mailto:abelyang@twnic.net.tw" . 0.0.3.3 60 IN NAPTR 100 3 "u" "TEL+E2U" = "!^.*$!tel:+886223411313!" . 3.1.3.1 60 IN NAPTR 100 10 "u" "SMTP+E2U" = "!^.*$!tel:+86535413300" . _________________________________________________________________________= ___________________ =20 the last 2 RR, maybe become a RECURSIVE ( you can me , I call you ) = , I wonder How to avoid it ?=20 DNS administrator or Resolver SHOULD to fix it !? Because maybe I turn number A to number B which is forgien ( = A->B->C->D->A) Or it will be a unlimit loop ? OR it's my problem , because i am beginer. Thanks=20 Abel ------=_NextPart_000_04C3_01C12F2E.8C909050 Content-Type: text/html; charset="big5" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi everybody:
        I am = programming ENUM=20 resolver with linux , but think a PROBLEM ( maybe not) .
________________________________________________________________= ________________
$TTL 86400
@      =20 86400   IN      = SOA    =20 pc071.twnic.net.tw. abel.pc071.twnic.net.tw.=20 (
           &n= bsp;   =20 200105264
          =      =20 14400
          &nbs= p;    =20 3600
           = ;    =20 3600000
          &n= bsp;    =20 172800 )
       =20 IN      NS     =20 pc071.twnic.net.tw.
       =20 IN      NS     =20 NS.RIPE.NET.
$ORIGIN 1.4.3.2.2.6.8.8.e164.arpa.
0.0.3.3=20 60      IN     =20 NAPTR   100    =20 1       "u"    =20 "SIP+E2U"       "!^.*$!sip:abelyang@twnic.net.tw!"&n= bsp;    =20 .
0.0.3.3 60      = IN     =20 NAPTR   100    =20 2       "u"    =20 "SMTP+E2U"      "!^.*$!mailto:abelyang@twnic.net.tw"   =20 .
0.0.3.3 60      = IN     =20 NAPTR   100    =20 3       "u"    =20 "TEL+E2U"      =20 "!^.*$!tel:+886223411313!"      .
3.1.3.1 60     =20 IN      NAPTR   = 100    =20 10      "u"    =20 "SMTP+E2U"     =20 "!^.*$!tel:+86535413300"    .
________________________________________________________________= ____________________________
        =    =20
    the last 2 RR, maybe become a = RECURSIVE (=20 you can me , I call you ) ,
    I wonder How to avoid it ? =
    DNS administrator or Resolver = SHOULD to fix=20 it !?
    Because maybe I turn number A to = number B=20 which is forgien  ( A->B->C->D->A)
    Or it will be a unlimit loop = ?
 
    OR it's my problem , because i am = beginer.
 
    Thanks
 
    Abel
 
------=_NextPart_000_04C3_01C12F2E.8C909050-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 28 05:38:22 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA00543 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 05:38:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA06445; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 05:19:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA06414 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 05:19:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from internal.mail.demon.net (internal.mail.demon.net [193.195.224.3]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA00293 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 05:18:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from finch-staff-1.server.demon.net (finch-staff-1.server.demon.net [193.195.224.1]) by internal.mail.demon.net with ESMTP id f7S9JV210254; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:19:31 GMT Received: from clive by finch-staff-1.server.demon.net with local (Exim 3.33 #1) id 15bf0L-000JJs-00; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:17:53 +0100 Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 10:17:53 +0100 From: "Clive D.W. Feather" To: abel Cc: enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] Enum Resolver Message-ID: <20010828101753.H64001@demon.net> References: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel>; from abelyang@twnic.net.tw on Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 07:29:11PM +0800 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org abel said: > 0.0.3.3 60 IN NAPTR 100 3 "u" "TEL+E2U" "!^.*$!tel:+886223411313!" . > 3.1.3.1 60 IN NAPTR 100 10 "u" "SMTP+E2U" "!^.*$!tel:+86535413300" . Should that last one be "TEL+E2U" ? To be honest, I'm having trouble understanding these codes, since the URI should tell you all you need to know, surely ? > the last 2 RR, maybe become a RECURSIVE ( you can me , I call you ) , > I wonder How to avoid it ? > DNS administrator or Resolver SHOULD to fix it !? This is explained in RFC 2916 section 3.2.2 example 2. "The client is responsible for loop detection". So your code, resolving the records, needs to discover the loop and take action. What isn't clear from the RFC is *which* number in the loop should be telephoned. The original ? The last one before the loop is detected ? The one that the original lookup produced ? The 8th number in the loop (or any other constant number) ? -- Clive D.W. Feather | Work: | Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 Internet Expert | Home: | Fax: +44 20 8371 1037 Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | DFax: +44 20 8371 4037 Thus plc | | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 28 07:42:25 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA04744 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:42:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA08955; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:06:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA08927 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:06:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from twnic.net.tw (twnic.net.tw [211.72.210.250]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA02751 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:05:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from abel (pc072.twnic.net.tw [211.72.211.72]) by twnic.net.tw (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA21412; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:06:39 +0800 Message-ID: <003b01c12fb1$f82fbec0$48d348d3@abel> From: "abel" To: "Clive D.W. Feather" , References: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel> <20010828101753.H64001@demon.net> Subject: Re: [Enum] Enum Resolver Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 19:09:55 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > abel said: > > 0.0.3.3 60 IN NAPTR 100 3 "u" "TEL+E2U" "!^.*$!tel:+886223411313!" . > > 3.1.3.1 60 IN NAPTR 100 10 "u" "SMTP+E2U" "!^.*$!tel:+86535413300" . > > Should that last one be "TEL+E2U" ? To be honest, I'm having trouble > understanding these codes, since the URI should tell you all you need to > know, surely ? Yes ,it should be "TEL+URI" sorry. > > > the last 2 RR, maybe become a RECURSIVE ( you can me , I call you ) , > > I wonder How to avoid it ? > > DNS administrator or Resolver SHOULD to fix it !? > > This is explained in RFC 2916 section 3.2.2 example 2. "The client is > responsible for loop detection". So your code, resolving the records, needs > to discover the loop and take action. Thanks for your answer ! I think that LOOP maybe unlimit , And to program it is diffcult , Because We have to detect ALL the "TEL+URI" record , and maybe they have 100 links . is it possible ? > > What isn't clear from the RFC is *which* number in the loop should be > telephoned. The original ? The last one before the loop is detected ? > The one that the original lookup produced ? The 8th number in the loop > (or any other constant number) ? > > -- > Clive D.W. Feather | Work: | Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 > Internet Expert | Home: | Fax: +44 20 8371 1037 > Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | DFax: +44 20 8371 4037 > Thus plc | | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 > > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > enum@ietf.org > http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Tue Aug 28 07:42:30 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA04745 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:42:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA09239; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:23:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA09208 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:23:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from internal.mail.demon.net (internal.mail.demon.net [193.195.224.3]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA03501 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 07:22:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from finch-staff-1.server.demon.net (finch-staff-1.server.demon.net [193.195.224.1]) by internal.mail.demon.net with ESMTP id f7SBNn229096; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 11:23:49 GMT Received: from clive by finch-staff-1.server.demon.net with local (Exim 3.33 #1) id 15bgwd-000NLb-00; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:22:11 +0100 Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 12:22:11 +0100 From: "Clive D.W. Feather" To: abel Cc: enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] Enum Resolver Message-ID: <20010828122211.C64001@demon.net> References: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel> <20010828101753.H64001@demon.net> <003b01c12fb1$f82fbec0$48d348d3@abel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <003b01c12fb1$f82fbec0$48d348d3@abel>; from abelyang@twnic.net.tw on Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 07:09:55PM +0800 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org abel said: >> This is explained in RFC 2916 section 3.2.2 example 2. "The client is >> responsible for loop detection". So your code, resolving the records, needs >> to discover the loop and take action. > Thanks for your answer ! > I think that LOOP maybe unlimit , And to program it is diffcult , > Because We have to detect ALL the "TEL+URI" record , and maybe > they have 100 links . > is it possible ? The classic approach, used in Unix symbolic links, is to take N steps and, if the process has not terminated, assume that you're in a loop. On FreeBSD 3.5 the value of N is called MAXSYMLINKS and defaults to 32; the resulting error is called ELOOP. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Work: | Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 Internet Expert | Home: | Fax: +44 20 8371 1037 Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | DFax: +44 20 8371 4037 Thus plc | | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Wed Aug 29 00:32:03 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA29203 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:32:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA09637; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:21:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA09557 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:21:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from market0 ([208.158.105.111]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA28926 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 00:20:17 -0400 (EDT) From: promotion@market.gogocity.com Received: from mail pickup service by market0 with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:18:12 -0700 To: Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 21:18:11 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_CE128_01C13006.F1149700" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Aug 2001 04:18:12.0209 (UTC) FILETIME=[9DD53E10:01C13041] Subject: [Enum] ADV: Cell Phone Accessories Blow Out Start @ $5.95 Free Shipping Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_CE128_01C13006.F1149700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Big Saving from GoGoCity. If you'd rather not receive any future promotional E-mails from GoGoCity.com, please click --> Un-Subscribe My E-mai l International Order Welcome FREE SHIPPING NOT APPLY Cell Phone Accessories Blow out Sale...!! Save Up to 80%...!! ***** FREE SHIPPING (in US only) ***** Why pay more in Retail Store..??? 1. Antenna Booster for All Cell Phone (1pack) 9. Antenna Booster for All Cell Phone (5 pack) Antenna Booster for All Cell Phone (1pack) large image Retail Price: $19.95 Blow Out Price: $5.95 (save 75%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping Antenna Booster for All Cell Phone (5 pack) large image Retail Price: $99.75 Blow Out Price: $19.95 (save 80%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping 2. NOKIA 51xx/6xx Black Car Charger 10. Nokia 3310/3390 Data Cable NOKIA 51xx/6xx Black Car Charger large image Retail Price: $19.99 Blow Out Price: $5.49 (save 73%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping Nokia 82xx/33xx Data Cable large image Retail Price: $79.99 Blow Out Price: $19.95 (save 75%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping 3. NOKIA 82xx/33xx Black Car Charger 11. Nokia 8260/8290 Li-ion 1200mAh 12 Lights Flashing & Vib Battery NOKIA 82xx/33xx Black Car Charger large image Retail Price: $19.99 Blow Out Price: $5.49 (save 73%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping Nokia 82xx/33xx Li-ion 1200mAh 12 Lights Flashing & Vib Battery large image Retail Price: $65.99 Blow Out Price: $24.95 (save 62%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping 4. NOKIA 51xx/61xx Hands Free with on/off Switch 12. NOKIA 51xx/6xx Data Cable NOKIA 51xx/61xx Hands Free with on/off Switch large image Retail Price: $19.99 Blow Out Price: $5.99 (save 70%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping NOKIA 51xx/6xx Data Cable large image Retail Price: $69.99 Blow Out Price: $14.95 (save 79%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping 5. NOKIA 82xx/33xx Hands Free with on/off Switch 13. Nokia 8260/8290 Li-ion 1200mAh Vibrating Battery NOKIA 82xx/33xx Hands Free with on/off Switch large image Retail Price: $19.99 Blow Out Price: $5.99 (save 70%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping Nokia 82xx/33xx Li-ion 1200mAh Vibrating Battery large image Retail Price: $45.99 Blow Out Price: $24.95 (save 46%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping 6. NOKIA 51xx/6xx Li-ion 3200mAh Vibrating Battery 14.Nokia 51xx/6xx Super Slim Black Li-ion 1200mAh Vib Battery NOKIA 51xx/6xx Li-ion 3200mAh Vibrating Battery large image Retail Price: $79.99 Blow Out Price: $34.95 (save 56%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping Nokia 51xx/6xx Super Slim Black Li-ion 1200mAh Vib Battery large image Retail Price: $70.99 Blow Out Price: $29.95 (save 58%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping 7. NOKIA 51xx/6xx Black NIMH-700mAh Vibrating Battery 15. Nokia 3310/3390 Vertical Leather Magnetic Button Pouch NOKIA 51xx/6xx Black NIMH-700mAh Vibrating Battery large image Retail Price: $45.99 Blow Out Price: $14.95 (save 67%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping Nokia 82xx/33xx Vertical Leather Magnetic Button Pouch large image Retail Price: $24.99 Blow Out Price: $9.95 (save 60%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping 8. Nokia 8260/8290 Data Cable 16. Nokia 8260/8290 Vertical Leather Magnetic Button Pouch NOKIA 51xx/6xx Data Cable large image Retail Price: $79.99 Blow Out Price: $19.95 (save 75%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping Nokia 82xx/33xx Vertical Leather Magnetic Button Pouch large image Retail Price: $24.99 Blow Out Price: $9.95 (save 60%) More Details... Buy it NOW !! Free Shipping ------=_NextPart_000_CE128_01C13006.F1149700 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=20


Big Saving = from GoGoCity.=20 If you'd rather not receive any future promotional E-mails from = GoGoCity.com,=20
please click --> Un-Subscribe=20 My E-mail
International=20 Order Welcome=20 FREE SHIPPING NOT APPLY

=20
=20
Cell=20 Phone Accessories
Blow out Sale...!!
Save Up to 80%...!!
***** FREE=20 SHIPPING (in=20 US only) *****
Why pay more in = Retail Store..???

=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
1.=20 Antenna Booster for All Cell Phone = (1pack) 9.=20 Antenna Booster for All Cell Phone (5 = pack)
=20 Retail=20 Price: $19.95
Blow Out Price: $5.95 = (save 75%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
=20 Retail=20 Price: $99.75
Blow Out Price: $19.95 (save = 80%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
2.=20 NOKIA=20 51xx/6xx Black Car Charger 10.=20 Nokia 3310/3390 Data Cable
=20 Retail=20 Price: $19.99
Blow Out Price: $5.49 (save = 73%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
 =20 Retail=20 Price: $79.99
Blow Out Price: $19.95 (save = 75%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
3.=20 NOKIA=20 82xx/33xx Black Car Charger
 11.=20 Nokia 8260/8290 Li-ion 1200mAh 12=20 Lights Flashing=20 & Vib Battery
=20 Retail=20 Price: $19.99
Blow Out Price: $5.49 (save = 73%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
 =20 Retail=20 Price: $65.99
Blow Out Price: $24.95 (save = 62%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
4.=20 NOKIA=20 51xx/61xx Hands Free with on/off = Switch 12.=20 NOKIA=20 51xx/6xx Data Cable
=20 Retail=20 Price: $19.99
Blow Out Price: $5.99 (save = 70%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
 =20 Retail=20 Price: $69.99
Blow Out Price: $14.95 (save = 79%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
5.=20 NOKIA=20 82xx/33xx Hands Free with on/off = Switch 13.=20 Nokia 8260/8290 Li-ion 1200mAh Vibrating = Battery
=20 Retail=20 Price: $19.99
Blow Out Price: $5.99 (save = 70%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
 =20 Retail=20 Price: $45.99
Blow Out Price: $24.95 (save = 46%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
6.=20 NOKIA=20 51xx/6xx Li-ion 3200mAh Vibrating = Battery 14.Nokia=20 51xx/6xx Super Slim Black Li-ion 1200mAh Vib = Battery
=20 Retail=20 Price: $79.99
Blow Out Price: $34.95 (save = 56%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
 =20 Retail=20 Price: $70.99
Blow Out Price: $29.95 (save = 58%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
7.=20 NOKIA=20 51xx/6xx Black NIMH-700mAh Vibrating = Battery 15.=20 Nokia 3310/3390 Vertical Leather Magnetic Button = Pouch
=20 Retail=20 Price: $45.99
Blow Out Price: $14.95 (save = 67%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
 =20 Retail=20 Price: $24.99
Blow Out Price: $9.95 (save = 60%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
8.=20 Nokia 8260/8290 Data Cable 16.=20 Nokia 8260/8290 Vertical Leather Magnetic Button = Pouch
=20 Retail=20 Price: $79.99
Blow Out Price: $19.95 (save = 75%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping		 =20 Retail=20 Price: $24.99
Blow Out Price: $9.95 (save = 60%)
More=20 Details...
Buy it = NOW !!=20 Free=20 Shipping
------=_NextPart_000_CE128_01C13006.F1149700-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 30 08:11:17 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA11996 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:11:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA24986; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:59:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id HAA24906 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:59:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA11432 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:57:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [63.221.166.163] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id hxsnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:59:34 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010830075528.02aabb98@exchange.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@exchange.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 07:59:07 -0400 To: From: "A.M.Rutkowski" In-Reply-To: <003b01c12fb1$f82fbec0$48d348d3@abel> References: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel> <20010828101753.H64001@demon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_775924029==_" X-VSMLoop: netmagic.com Subject: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_775924029==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed The Internet-Draft is fairly self explanatory. A visual aid is also attached. --tony ==================================================================== Framework for ENUM Neutrality A.M. Rutkowski Document: VeriSign, Inc Expires: 1 Mar 2002 29 Aug 2001 Framework for ENUM Neutrality The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. Abstract The pursuit by major national Administrations of declared policies of ENUM technical and administrative neutrality among implementations in the marketplace suggest the need for a framework for such neutrality and a focus on interworking among them. [1] [2] This document draws upon the ENUM Working Group archive of discussions as well as public activities in other standards forums and the marketplace to construct an ENUM options framework for facilitating neutrality. This framework includes not only protocol considerations, but also various critical technical and administrative support functions such as authentication and ancillary directory services. ==================================================================== --=====================_775924029==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="draft-rutkowski-enum-neutrality-00.txt" Framework for ENUM Neutrality A.M. Rutkowski Document: VeriSign, Inc Expires: 1 Mar 2002 29 Aug 2001 Framework for ENUM Neutrality Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is NOT offered in accordance with Section 10 of RFC2026, and the author does not provide the IETF with any rights other than to publish as an Internet-Draft. However, see Author's Copyright Statement, below which accomplishes the same public availability. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. Abstract The pursuit by major national Administrations of declared policies of ENUM technical and administrative neutrality among implementations in the marketplace suggest the need for a framework for such neutrality and a focus on interworking among them. [1] [2] This document draws upon the ENUM Working Group archive of discussions as well as public activities in other standards forums and the marketplace to construct an ENUM options framework for facilitating neutrality. This framework includes not only protocol considerations, but also various critical technical and administrative support functions such as authentication and ancillary directory services. Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. Scope 3. ENUM Neutrality Framework and Elements 4. Security Considerations 5. References 6. Author's Address 7. Author's Copyright Statement 1. Introduction In the course of its development of domestic and international policies relating to ENUM implementations, the U.S. government established a set of principles for ENUM implementation neutrality. These principles were conveyed to the ITU-T Meeting of Study Group 2 (Geneva, 4-14 Sep 2001) along with a call for ongoing work of the Study Group to reflect these principles. [1] [2] These principles will be considered if not adopted by multiple Administrations. The principles call for several ongoing actions among multiple technical and operational communities. These include a requirement that "...deployments of ENUM and other similar protocols in any other top level DNS domain, nor restrict the development of other innovative services that may serve as competing ENUM alternatives." See [1] It notes specifically that "the promotion of interworking between different approaches and systems should be an ongoing pursuit." As general norms, ENUM implementations "must not be inconsistent with the positive goals of competition in telecommunications, the encouragement of innovation, the promotion of advanced data services, and the minimization of regulatory involvement and intervention." Ibid. ENUM is essentially about using a telephone number representation to map in diverse ways to some set of applications on various networked devices employed by a user or user agents for communication purposes. Telephone numbers are one of many identifiers possible to do this. The foci of recent ENUM efforts have been Internet based, although there have been numerous efforts undertaken to devise universal communications identifiers over many years. [3] The work on ENUM has proceeded over nearly the past decade going back to the pioneering work of Marshall Rose and Carl Malamud in 1993 that resulted in the Rose-Malamud schema for representing a telephone number in the Internet Domain Name System (DNS). [4] [5] [6] [7] When more recent efforts to establish telephone number mapping schema arose in the IETF in 1998, an array of different protocols and schema were proposed. At about the same time, pioneering companies like NetNumber began to develop and introduce ENUM implementations in the commercial marketplace using a combination of both DNS and LDAP protocols. [8] [9] [10] Last year, one particular ENUM approach based on the Rose-Malamud DNS schema and using a new DNS resource record type developed by Michael Mealling and Ron Daniel - Naming Authority Pointers (NAPTR) was considered by an IETF Working Group and denominated a Proposed Standard. [11] [12] Almost immediately, liaison communications via the Internet Society ensued with ITU-T Study Group 2 and ITU staff attempting to establish some kind of ITU related administrative relationship associated with this particular ENUM approach. The proposed standard attracted interest among some technical communities as a possible Internet DNS based mapping service based on telephone numbers to create a "universal communications identifier." This interest is reflected in some current ITU-T draft material that exclusively deals with the RFC 2916 ENUM schema. The RFC 2916 approach is attractive for its simplicity and flexibility in the use of URIs. However, it has some attributes, however, that may make it unattractive as a universal communications identifier in the public commercial marketplace. These notably include: 1) the ambiguous mapping of telephone numbers to end user identifiers, 2) the inability to control access to information that user may want to keep private, and 3) the tendencies to associate the number with E.164 regulatory regimes and telephone provider relationships. Additionally, the performance and trust characteristics of the RFC 2916 ENUM approach on a large-scale for some of its potential applications are completely unknown - particularly with multiple tiers. Although these may not be relevant in closed corporate Intranets, these factors represent very substantial consumer marketplace impediments. Late last year, NetNumber, Inc. evolved its hybrid DNS/LDAP ENUM solution to technically conform with RFC2916 by providing DNS based NAPTR lookups from the domain "e164.com". Several parties - including VeriSign - have maintained testbeds for experimentation, as required for new Internet protocols to determine protocol workability and marketplace interest. At the same time during the past year, a variety of telephony/ wireless, Internet standards, and large-scale proprietary provider developments have occurred that make it clear that multiple ENUM approaches and continuing evolution of the marketplace will continue. These developments include an ensemble of standards and services collectively known as Presence and Access Management (PAM), and the emergence of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) as a kind of universal communication platform. [10] - [17] These commercial implementations appear to provide viable solutions to the mapping, privacy, customer control, and security problems extant with the RFC 2916 approach. The resulting environment is almost certain to be richly multiprotocol and highly competitive among small and large players in the commercial marketplace worldwide. 2. Scope This is an informational Internet Draft containing a proposed technical and administrative framework and elements for ENUM neutrality among implementations. Such a framework is important to assure that if some special public governmental or intergovernmental arrangements are sought for particular ENUM offerings in the marketplace, such actions: 1) avoid prejudice to commercial ENUM offerings employing other element options, and 2) provide for fair and non-discriminatory access by other commercial competitive ENUM providers to publicly supported administrative and information resources. 3. ENUM Neutrality Framework and Elements In light of the requirement for ENUM neutrality, a wealth of discussions in the ENUM Working Group and other diverse forums, including commercial initiatives of AOL, Microsoft, and Sun in the entwined Presence and Access Management (PAM) sphere, can be assembled as an ensemble of different ENUM related implementation options. A. Mapping Protocol components for Telephone Number to Object Tags Basic Elements and Options: o Number Specification - E.164 - E.191 - Other o Querying Protocol(s) - DNS - LDAP - HTTP - Other o Querying Protocol Port and Other Variables - Standard (e.g., 53, 80, 389) - Other o Domain Used - e164.arpa. - e164.int. - e164.com. - e164.net. - other - Not Applicable o Number Structure - Rose-Malamud (e.g., 2.2.3.5.5.2.2.8.8.8.1.[domain] ) - DNS number (18882255322.[domain] ) - XML schema - Telcordia GR Series specification for SS7 based data - Proprietary - Other o Record Type(s) (for DNS based ENUM) - NAPTR [RFC2915] - SRV [RFC2782] - A [RFC1035] - AAAA (IPv6) - CNAME [RFC1035] - DNAME [RFC2672] - NS [RFC1035] - PTR [RFC1035] - RP [RFC1183] - LOC (geo location) - TKEY [RFC2930] - TSIG [RFC2845] - SIG [RFC2535] - KEY [RFC2535] - CERT [RFC2538] - Not Applicable o Objects - regex+URI - URI - rules - routing preferences - IP address - other data o Presence, Privacy and Access Controls - PAMforum PAM Specification - SIMPLE - Proprietary (AOL, Microsoft, Sun) - Other - None o Administrative Architecture - Numbering Plan Administration - Government - Cartel - Tiered Providers (e.g., Level 0, 1, 2, 3, ...) - Registry-Registrar bifurcation (e.g., using EPP) - Commercial enterprise - Other B. Support Components Basic Elements and Options: o Number Authentication - User service provider or agent - CNAM query - LIDB query - Other - None o Query Authentication(s) - DNSsec - Digital certificates - Reverse DNS lookups - SIMPLE - Proprietary (AOL, Microsoft, Sun) - Other - None o Object Authentication(s) - User service provider or agent - Digital certificates - SIMPLE - Proprietary (AOL, Microsoft, Sun) - Other - None o Ancillary Directory - LDAP - Whois - Aggregated directory information (e.g., RWhois,RDAP) - Disaggregated directory information - None Example 1: Using this framework, RFC2916 ENUM implementations would consist of the following Elements and options: A. Mapping Protocol components o Number Specification - E.164 o Querying Protocol - DNS o Querying Protocol Port and Other Variables - Standard (53) o Domain Used - e164.arpa. o Number Structure - Rose-Malamud (e.g., 2.2.3.5.5.2.2.8.8.8.1.[domain] ) o Record Type (for DNS based ENUM) - NAPTR [RFC2915] o Objects - regex+URI o Presence, Privacy and Access Control - None o Administrative Architecture - Government B. Support Components None specified Example 2: Using this framework, a hypothetical commercial competitive ENUM implementation might consist of the following Elements and options: A. Mapping Protocol components o Number Specification - E.164 o Querying Protocol(s) - DNS - LDAP - HTTP o Querying Protocol Port and Other Variables - Standard (e.g., 53, 80, 389) o Domain Used - e164.net. o Number Structure - Rose-Malamud (e.g., 2.2.3.5.5.2.2.8.8.8.1.e164.net) o Record Type(s) (for DNS based ENUM) - SRV - A o Objects - PAM based data o Presence, Privacy and Access Control - PAM implementation o Administrative Architecture - Commercial enterprise B. Support Components o Number Authentication - User service provider or agent - LIDB query o Query Authentication(s) - Digital certificates - Reverse DNS lookups - Proprietary (AOL, Microsoft, Sun) o Object Authentication(s) - User service provider or agent - Digital certificates - Proprietary (AOL, Microsoft, Sun) o Ancillary Directory - Aggregated directory information (e.g., RWhois, RDAP) 4. Security Considerations The diverse array of ENUM implementations in the marketplace give rise to a number of authentication, security, and privacy considerations. This framework attempts to identify some of these considerations as elements within the proffered framework. The providers of ENUM services will likely deploy an array of methods to enhance trust in the mapping of telephone numbers to digital objects. This autonomy suggests the usefulness of common trust methods and the availability of SS7 based services such as LIDB and CNAM. 5. References [1] United States of America, Participation in a Global Common ENUM DNS Domain, Doc. COM2-D.46, ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector, Study Group 2, Geneva, 4 September - 14 September 2001. [2] United States of America, Continuation of the Rapporteur's Group on ENUM Supplement, Doc. COM2-D.43, ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector, Study Group 2, Geneva, 4 September - 14 September 2001. [3] ITU-T Rec. F.500, International public directory services (08/92) [4] M. Rose and C. Malamud, An Experiment in Remote Printing, RFC 1486 (Aug 1993) [5] M. Rose and C. Malamud, Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: Remote Printing -- Technical Procedures, RFC 1528 (Oct 1993 [6] M. Rose and C. Malamud, Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: Remote Printing -- Administrative Policies, RFC 1529 (Oct 1993 [7] M. Rose and C. Malamud, Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: General Principles and Policy, RFC 1530 (Oct 1993). [8] IETF ENUM Working Group archives, ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/enum/ [9] NetNumber, Inc. site, http://www.netnumber.com [10] A. Gulbrandsen, P. Vixie, L. Esibov, A DNS RR for specifying the location of services (DNS SRV), RFC 2782, Feb 2000 [11] M. Mealling, R. Daniel, The Naming Authority Pointer (NAPTR) DNS Resource Record, RFC 2915 (Sep 2000) [12] P. Falstrom, E.164 number and DNS, RFC 2916 (Sep 2000) [13] IETF Secretariat, IETF SIMPLE Working Group, http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/simple-charter.html [13] PAM Forum, PAM Specification Document, Ver. 1.0, http://www.pamforum.org/learn_more/PAMspec_1.0draft3.pdf (Apr 2001) [14] AOL Time-Warner, Open IM Architecture Design, http://aim.aol.com/openim/ [15] FCC Public Release, Messaging Interoperability, (DA No. 01-1791), (Dkt No 00-30). FCC 27 July 2001 http://www.fcc.gov/csb/aolim1.pdf [16] Microsoft, Windows XP home, http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/default.asp [17] Sun Microsystems, Liberty (SunOne), http://www.iplanet.com/learning/cd_content/sunone_ip.html (17 Aug 2001) 6. Author's Address for Comments Anthony M. Rutkowski Vice President for Internet Strategy VeriSign, Inc. 505 Huntmar Park Drive Herndon VA 20170 USA mailto:trutkowski@netsol.com tel: +1 703.742.4905 7. Author's Copyright Statement This compilation is expressly placed in the public domain by the author and is available to anyone for any purpose except their assertion of copyright ownership. --=====================_775924029==_ Content-Type: application/zip; name="ENUM_neutrality.zip"; x-mac-type="705A4950"; x-mac-creator="705A4950" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ENUM_neutrality.zip" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 UEsDBBQAAAAIAIE+HiuLhJnTBCsAAADYAAATAAAARU5VTV9uZXV0cmFsaXR5LnBwdOxcDXRU1bXe 92f+kgx3CH95msIVocUKGKCitrYkBFQwCQMEsdZKhsmFjEwy48wkNNZXwq8/xb50Yf1rX41oXdTV 94o/fb7nejX4U39B0IiltbbYut5SlrXja98r5T2dt/c+987c+bmBhJC+t9a7WfvMueees8/59t5n n33Oncmhg2OP3v/IWe9AwfUlUOCTjA/ctjLJJL4CANeY959kMhmrOPP/1/+p62Ok61FvCpKK5EIi nXuQvEg+pDKkcqQKJD/SGCRNmACMRapEGoc0HmkC0kSkSUhVSH+DdBbS2UjVSJ9Cmow0BUlHOgdp KtK5SNOQpiN9GukzSDOQzkP6LNL5SDORZiHNRroAqQZpDtJcpHlIn0O6EGk+0kVIFyNdgvR5pC8g XYr0RSDbBliAVItUh7QQqR5pEdJipMuQLke6AmkJ0lKkK5EakBqRmpCWIQWRliOtQFqJ1Iy0Cukq pNVIVyN9GcT8IIpg/qtI1yGtQWpBCiGtRQojtSIZSOuQ1iO12dp+MqgWh3+tgBj+pVAXi6EDPxPQ DUO5JqLFWLzIFwRu39z63WUHx+44Bg/Dv5z3nr1u3+r+WUvnPC19hW4UURbE3jci6gTnIjwGHTUR Q4l0Qjs+oRLnawbIkmyyozEMUjV7Uf3HfizyLtQc9dOOmiDsS7C/ddh7gktSOKIYljhf1D/NG0sG g1TNXtci/apK5F1FWIc2nouxf7s+S/VX6mqVxacG7ylPaeTH31dovvXg5D2KE3s+TuzDE4U/oPlP PoHypv+XNPh3pUGmefiiRn6hBl7XVPO5Boc9N3HFJzSaU804akKXRM024edG/CS7I0SEZeb8AZhx pBICSC2VnhqvOUYq+48H3DUw3l0ZyPIK4bwQbWF4vKbqJq/VbG/rcd6JzyTAkHjJ491yjSMvnf3S EHhV1pq86lDbEWwXxfxweBFGgAc18tM97Fkktk/yzz/gUpyn3tmsKw/f/VArM/My+FTyjA9o1BPO 7Y/JU6LI2DvRZX1iLbYhapXJ/IFLhA2yaUvcHHRJFybjovqiBeVblBbFyveoPWQ6aDflap/Ca0v6 bn7qTrdgKs8U688TYI1XfFKVTWZXYwQrXo/c5r0b8tcyt/lJgyAUqkmKtzxNzDZDjSHBFrj7UYCt nN/G+e3c4mbu9xZOb+W0H2isFdKfUJw9jHIz+QLvFonGtJVKvNs4v4OWGbj5aebANW/l9DZOv8np Tk5v5/RbnP4dp72cfofTOzm9i/nczfl7OL2X0+9y+j0JodT2S9W4zu6TsMj7NI/hGfIT8BzX+RmP 53nm8wKXvMjpS5y+zOkr0oW4GO8nBnCAS17l9CC3OsT51zh9nXqBAU7f4PQwp29y+nP2zxlpDOmE 9S/J+OGV5VdeeQVUmcbmki9GM3Vz6uE6Xk59/LSM8+WcVnCJn/NjONVkMoAA58dyukAm2+jh/Gau v0Um29gqfw/DhW1cvl1O/8UNOzh/s/xnZNAvS6jNfVzyNKfPyGQlz3L+OU5/xunznL7A6YucvsTp y3JNJ8pNPlQ5DvbLNb//IHNArm2+FV6VcRrCQUwzmUNYszvzmkzz+XVZx1BiQA4+i3JjDoflAAY+ b8rxO1Bu8t5LM5kjXP4LLv8ll2fkiRg9qQrJtlahOVCn7DlPgoU8Y+q5ZJFy01MSLOaSTUoAo51t nN/O6Q5Ob+b0Fk5vY246nPURzY9jx45BzeM1UAuTP6IYj2xaEirxkqSmQFqj2Argjwr5FFnU4Usi l2N7ZsWVIOrxMw0Oeb4uUQw4Xq3mJxNUqvvkpzo/gJfv/cLcpgMv0Sc2wHXmhLKe63zCyHiyf6xQ qNdaQHZXWH2kEqxrHca4+z8WS2Mc/kux6sS9uXsWZjkNyaNeyk9FH+eYvK3P1f/qrjnyluBdddEA FF1SJfIYl8ejcJynxiNjiVatsD0iUU8Bbx7/hSD4Wp9XIPaf/1T0IUGpqxIN4hea4PtLTahnOoa0 hWVfRFWltbvY5wp1WrKjcchZ5vdplooB9mgU8i8MJSNJfV0soS9uWtWoNxmdqUQoGkl1B8zKom2f 9q6LYubZGPXMRvu7HFffLo4GO7LxkI4xVphX5bW8thoIUscYvR7/ZgLFisswNwsji2aMlurMMgNV S21jGD3pyD3F0ZOB+wkduRtwA0ZZEc5Z/dAqm8LYgur5cU8ym/9amVMU+XTn1RR8F2Ovq3BPoPPK 3MrlxIMQ6FiP4p4Itg7xfRxTeh5jPFHmQ4hE6+6C1lQvjp9RvCeZRBlXE2LRsScRpVBrwtvBEaJA luQoPoJ9pExEBrewuBDXnGwFDnu/xLOD9SDizS5un+SnXczXyJOVziPpttUxGBHVEXqLY0nKjIvy ZRZlnZC2c30loVon+VsjF1Jr5zGK6NcatdgtUPuNjH9Dto+13CPtKwyuT1HZOvwzWEICeQg5C94h HGebicrSYxIRJZl7O5cnOersxBG3mvxFXZ1HtB5i2b7jWCuB9cm+UoxlfQmrDrE+ST40chE1Cgtt zZNRhOUXBcPW0pIDjWsqlnfySIUVpLKjI45hs17ExCKQb+SRtUHOOuJYL8mllr7Xs1yiNlvP12VO F8KCU2xbhlmLxtTBtmIf7Uxbj4Y5OpJVCHvL4bNr126HxMPOwdkuQijDLtZO2JRnK/MIQbEdz7Tp 3OLczn2LuXujrXeLP9nQerYFehbjfZoYbxfQvO7KQ2Nxz1lrl/lMcCULaTB7K9Su1TYKtB8g/xc1 ZW/YNLOCveFcuATmwHw4mc340V/mW6ylMxpbGCKmbYod6AbWd5yxhrNW32pqnOZNB2OOIaducPIz tLO6X6MFaqlYJfj08CKOzUQ+YStfai4x47kG5SrN5zKfMT2s8YmSJJr4zdVEwYgVzEssVlZ8z8XZ Z/mLFZ1HXZYItRsbY4kNpRYsGrgO4tAKeAGU+BCLBlNlchXDEp16bJ1KZ77TYxwUaXBceZ7D6z8o VVbnssdnLdfW1QJpj27maTdw5513wttvvw3w7h6YN28/ZIJByByUsvWsA4Xq6mp8fg/Xo+dUSvUL 661Zs4Y/KYLs6emBxsZG2Ldvn63f/WbdO/BzP8zZlYF7kFsGeeNtEb958+hcbx08F78Xrmz6CTy3 +SB0PbGkqB7huL62C9764TPwTv+34bFXt8A//8MVRfVoTMvXfB3ue3mAx/XtH/fDB8d+hE8e0OhU UMrudyUOpeiyPov3u5K536VzSQp0A8hlJ1i7Zg0tX+YzR2rSyto6MggXHfgGWlzi9BLcb/DeWYZq LpvLzQ7xHpqsIFvPlea9NNlDtp4acIk9tT7oTt60L8edfIU5pqHu5IPY6wowT4x8tBu3ZoKUvRfc 5Oy94Khk7wVXNXsvOLcg5wqwTWegIF5oz5UtIZlJ2XwVyNn8eOvgkb2Kasv3lOBSZeMy3sal0sYl YOMSoPMAlQ4rNJDTx8vIJrxpmoXkpfwVVK6k7yyjTzVN520S+NIBKL5kKON2dOhOI6L6TwKF7qJc JiEgnwegPE02RucgKmLY2TGQPa+gsW+WsLW3XwrgSMRpAB3Tes09uMp7qnEw9SM6G+k3N2sB7uFx 2SOdLf9G0cCfruUxCScm0N7PPlhIJ8D+SeK7HtIU5x7mMyUpW4sQvG5DoJgIfocImm0Ijt6Qj6BH 8mRxbKUCL52XPJTZKZEd90vjUTNDRXZcemGEkdl1ozropqKzUDeeYermKWWVtEZ+Xz1TunE56Ca6 sbRuPCOmm6eUL8mfVkYWGS4sWWRuE9kAIqP3OBay1htLI3PnIRvIDAdTrxKER6R7RxST3d48Dva2 7W8L7U0e1N5kRwRx+aj0J8njGkkE/2lD4DUR1Evl6a/ZENzUk49AnLgukOgs19KQ7GB7ufPPDGpx jIlSnA2Ksz7rJI34b1KIsw29DDss9GvVSdKqCV0jqr+jkEPvM9HvQv3Ru8tNWM+FbZ/bOoC4ZbDO lQXKfsQ0NosM1w8TWWnNbZcOy/LEVTj2seY682y5FRVKOAsIUzPf5YeoOqb10Uh4g56K6UZrJKU3 hpIpI6GnIqmooSdT3VEDYLdGPZ5jthI4zwE7zmlSDmeZiXMr4qR3txbOD7YPnAbCP6vvy76Jk7RC hMRKNhF+n8vtJ097OD4pjdD4WkoATPpXGuFYR6seNbqMqL+5LZKw8pfFOhOpNusmss7Kk0wmZ2Ui 9iYVPBLKK5ynUQhZrQS7rF6FnKzKHWzixdtO3yZ6tVo57d4bKJQYcfVIQmILudxu530aPad38fdr VWZt8R0Aycxj7MbvXY5nLYlQHYIcqgoHVON7RwSVt0UrRkWVfLJAtYjLnVDRPDZRmfM4H9cJR1x+ B1zqd0YC195Ay4RiXDQW77BwyQW4juThIs1buCTChZREXMRrM49/l/St+74Jd0i//mkb+tnJdFhN UNCT0rdFFigkucAp7iB1eJLj+YV8XkEnC0kcxYfK9LLcbpZGq6hiNyuRY82OtkI97BOx9gEf7TpE rE1SCgRErL3BN4RYO2DF2kr6VVW0ay5shwo6fyLAXd5cOxkf0jI0DqVE+hPvVEprU7S/y0t9rJVE H2ttfdD7oSCW19JAlFwfCj6khepc7MPyIU49acyJ3pYuwuKN2CrmET21gS1KxUpyWU63px6Zlu7P GnlQFSOn/nps/bnM/h7D/hYW9De8OLL0OHQ1X4JOku7FZ0EcTw2xqMhJ2j1kSbuQe5OH3tsBdHuL Je0ZVNKD7c9K92eNPOASIy+UtPcUJD203VTpcRxV8yVI47jRNg6fOQ4rLj2d+Lr0COjSkVEIa362 hOTLBpW8bJO8fGqSp4ZY/KAkPAD196Ctv3KstAX7G4dx7LqC/s5E7Fo6ahVjfYGG6hXe6jxzrP9m G2sFVcrbNYg169IJu6VTX7NoTLKDr+tR43LvhKCnVOypwG6pMPZ0c37kYs+3wbZCm2gLY8/Ws3dL p7E2+1oUfdxRf6nYUzURruZygVCcLe3RznVCmOxcWwLktDyQ0/JA2rftY0yQhWGId8pQVFoaaosW l3VPj0PQKKBexuVOYUg1lAoaPWYQQrf5geMbkEOmOSC76dwRQebt1YqRicBRILuCy52QTYbSgaMd 2wlHbAEHbA2fGQlsRwO9E4qx0Vi8w8Iml8A2SABJnZ7RAFKDtPKyi0b2kfVNjh50JTUUHN7mAg4O t+Bn3AwOyfF6qkVYcJYLTj04rM4dxNoPlGQy6xKOZeeBU3Ms2cAQrx6PLpVylmVysbMs1pTzpozC mL/YtvfCj8jgtPlUHDD96rWhYtrnqx1bjIkae0z3eBWXD2frQqiOnwRVK9gCXhNVGFGRD92E/anm 4rxJolb90ljEk5G8iGSBLI5xBJK90lG5ZUywrJT3czESNT1RsgW7DhJMvzE0CR4tq5VBq5lQyje5 TauwH24I6fxvPNywr1NuUzqFHq/3raF4PEtG+ybQzDk6sZSP843AzDlxEhuz+3KPA7Kr3xweMpo/ xcjID1ne+/Tmz5GTYKO1IevLCVtFzqaFL9/KW4ld0vkD16NH3/OPt+MsqsQ2J/fo9DKWr/33sCff vz8Djz76KPb7knZEpf4r1D2q8OB9Kr36Ex6c0LuqhAe/WB2CB6/KeXD74bNM6i+zvxIwvR2uv5vh kg30leC//wnhpvw2zvcjmilD0iVdnZ5pg/r3Fr47ff/+kEY/wfkIp+pSebo0XVoqL5VjSkzZpe5S Cf1xsPl6B/QN7/WNKPqnffPHFqPnlcBEv5bLR2IlOBn+/wbbqmDiz73qEvhTcwfACb+YyUOXwiMT yAYOF81n4uYbARs4MQQZfAK21cpBBvF/cp4Bw5cBWUKxDGhF88p9I2AJR4YghTz/RlIYFf/2ofJr iTDkvqzjF7/KoDw3okie/B/9EID83w78rDX9H0mKfqtD/m+aNAT/NyPn/+jrVFn/h+W6TOt1eZpW d+vl27W+3VI/x0UZTiWFX1SdwoslvxnbcXX4ft7uwN6z4tDztMrCnstsPQ/2wmdMiZ4lKLEvIYGd 4X3Jh8qFs3Japn2HH8SVr+XCb127WPOvzRSaf2km/bhKaH420je8QvNrZg5B896c5t8F27ynBOf9 uVJ5GoO7rPyrM/fhvKdrC6dbOb2ZLU8cY22W6CteQzmoyv0IQfz8wNJmWonLuhooL70T3aPR9+SX dxqJ7kjHej2YiKVi4Vg0afmBcYIT+wHJvBN+gLDSq+SslXuFrVnRv+BvIf4RIna29V6MPeSJe0uu 3X64z9HWf2Pr/0oHWbdpfaMo66Da4hayrufyfFmTfeZkHUukLDFbvxkTYhZ3OTH/FnIwGxxgPj5u NGHW+PrKBcziI6k9fJbU1Nm+FrdDK1OJznCqM2FYSMcKPiZScZdDegfeLZQE0qYCpNvNBZGwLOLf hFqbSsie7b8iVRyn306Rt3mNU/EbqQw6m8nDQPqOvNdTo70jW9uQ3RVibMvMsSk4thYgbzNtUp9k nUbzMRHmtYKFu+K0Jb9c7pEu9FyplH4nKSTfbESNeFusw9CFDqywxpQ8QJ7cx7PcD9qwBYuwvXj2 aGCrlVs0fdznGduCEtjoF4rL1l5vhFN6c2h90oJVYYNVUQDrd5CbOM0mrHkIi9ZIa+L0TCk1cbZx eqamTy+CFdOnjsuLgVrTJ26ErZljAjVnTg6qmDkfQ06DqwpmTg/snOoM8sxoM+7qhRvlWzwEMsTl +SDJAhfPnjP/c35ML5njX5ZqE6Y6FUhndD2mU3c3iOhTmmuWWi/VH+LddBU+jEG9VM8nRBQbWEK4 qkgINeePvhDi8jXqci8JIczl+UKg9XRR00p/w6K6oP+K5uZgvhjGc7VCMYjSwcRwAnJiWF0khuC8 0RbDdleL2uf+gZvEcB2X54uBcKxMhTpaQ4nWfAloXKNQAqLU2o6UkkBMykng6iIJfFA/+oZQ44uX t/hIAuIHifkSoP92gYagr4gljVmNoWiovbPVTwUd7Af8Vzc26Mlwm9Ee8qN7D8cSrZGQfvkKPWkk IkZST6Kb8GPsFse7VCjR7W+6oM4SYZC7KBShKCURkvAe1jDY5X9FQhdF0hI/nWSWlGVLpoB1lRL7 byHnb7/sEKjMuGw0A5VD5Xv9gwcqLHaDRKo3d8eNbOQ7eKDye8gh/YoD0geXjCZSfVzvBIF0OZfn I6V/D1PX2h7piCRTiVAq0mXodYlwWyRl5EVn4tfCFmhxlwP9JuRAX2uC/iOG+/R/iizQexv6pDMD saUiDYdc9KrNn24oAZEOIsyQR6/rRC/SkYqEEWqsw0I3KQ/dpAJ0R2zovupkvMHRVGmvG3xCpeLn yPl4KRJbFGsPRbL4xP9usPCJuxy+s2w+8boin1i98q8QIbgHvIvYJ36Dy/Px0WZ8MQYIs+tWBOv8 nFvS1Cwy9csaRaZpcbM/RiuG3eVdwBwKXZ4oHWzVsB9ar3GwgKprR9MCegLpSmEB13B5voSmYRpM GEmjI2zMxL17pCsU7tZxHdXrwmEjmdTrYx2pRCxq2cd0wdu0D3GXs4+IzT5CRfbRsmb07YNcGr0S 9KcPcHk+evovR2K68246GurQ2cP5L491GYmOdpz//vpQIkXv3iJGwmj1rzDWk/vrniUyoYS/Ptbe biTCkVBUx+pGAhfQpJEfglzL3RUakyjNrZ8k3ovE6OkwyFwtPwXWVcrcZtgEvrZI4PuvGn2Bk7ml eULu5PJ8gZMTCtY18qbEv3JJY7BhsT3o0GfULWuYqTdGwolY8n/auxroqKo7f2eS+Z6XTD74EFAf AQUkpEmgFKhoQgKIhGTMh6CbWoaZl+SVybwwHwmx9MhaWbF1tyhUBWmlrrqU6qoLarfr9kSPtp5d 6cYDrLprt6za1Z6jp7hii+6u7P3/73vz3sybSSIz8x5YX5j3cd99997f/+t+/e9F6olX8x2JyDxG TK6V9kcVii7H9NIpykLHUk+ocxV6hWR6Kb257WTblrH6cYChMFTjbT3keosdG7drMTyVapCRH6CD PbOyD3kQkHoUEpgIsKD1IHb12YLP6aAFHegNCXNAz7c1WGuLyowA3aMDPbrVHNB1tvnF021TjADd qwO9dZs5oC+3BezXObxGgO7Tga7dbg5on+2Pzndcf7AZAPobOtDx28wBfZnL72so87gLBFo7KLFZ B3ruTnNAd3hGyvnJFV4AvQHDU0FDLeRfzrevaqpfWrcY0NcTtllaOnoHosfBGbs7GVLMBvORAvvo za02RoEwPTVoKAD53ZjBnXm1BWYmr7EsvCLds0XFrgxxl5wTBU66N5JTk0Y9UMIZFpVH/boWyYY9 RrdIeI63HLCNlAJ3tmN4KndgFrkrBm69QnRQDAr8QFQaFENC9EuBXmz+tTau41rWNK/I0AqpwzTS WyEsVGnXZWqFvE7UToKURiOlk0DuMbKTcJLz+1gngbWhUmkE3UA2bJ4c2nCyz52sH8Ce1H5As0YI BnRCULzX+GYpAAyhXTqI4akAYU+BqNArbJ3f1b6Gg180Ad53USkRh57BQFTooc1/2keKcWv8fCAU ol2mGOs18qFAPMApIsFmHdJFgoUqDdNDOGEKk70WDF1GlGO8JusWndEb+ZFZ1dsT3IESQ6q3qA70 zofNAb3Vfh+3s+QmR4FAw6iuYhZiMuj0sbGRHxdubOwJ2Q2dO7UGw/UTDY2RoBgOQ0etWYxScyBF hxWDwKYUFIOgTjAwg/AVjUGI6wzCe48ZXyuc9P2u0o9g78fwVLCwpTXOqKzvk8QY19jbS81DIC6E uGYxFlCfIrQ2SOr+Ffhxuu6z0NRuPltjwpxLmA0Ye1BcW+0n6GnkvKj2D3ig2t/lTZ/ZHpQZrM7+ LnrGiNlfqnwVSybvI2PNbA/W1dTx9Uv5xkQvX19bW0fGnNl2k/RR3aEsejn7Hwqnl7V2n4fpZWsG VFB6Hj1C0oas58bmKcp5EUtPVs6LkviYct6gUc6tOuXc/3PjlXOjXXQ3lAHif8TwVMQSYVMuHUKQ qmOvGA+E+aAQjYs9gJxW0e3CoBCNCTxECkvS5sRAjMtl1IlDFedptgNYhMNEq+IsbKLtveEsAlT8 y8IJ0IDH72MC1IbhqeQEceBlr4isEjSNJShL0LQkZCZBfo0E3ayToBdeMV6CDnh436UI+QiGp0IO kbEb/RmlKofhSgHzTa0ZKuXQsQRH2wz6pq4Z9Noxc5pBp23vlL9a8W+FGs+5WiNM23TC1P2vxnce Rj0/40ax8/DXGJ4KF9bQtDb6O9t5rqP9ep5rpP/owWPXcSXPNbMLtUUcRmr381xLWxPPda5deQM9 d6xZTb+EEz43rWzv1M5EsWUxh31a2Vkrh050qFvUyc67vzFHdiy2Bz13e98xot/wLR3oM2+aA9ru 2Of5jve9QvUbVhCN0zScvOfiNF1KbKcw58/gIv9iy7k7TwdamPP0DfTKy87TUD0FZzPn6T+u/QzO 07MzO09baXimwZVF/wwLR+DQCsKF5zwNc95JR32KlbeqnGfpK4jfOHqM6J2nd6aUdGwXaraLDeNk dhfq4iwUnz1qJMUL7kJtywLzoWNGwjTChdqehvR8cqF2yGVTO5rO19TN6C5sF2qnDtuVbxiBrcG6 sZAu1C4ZVroL9cu/yaQ4t+H5AnWhdqdpznbS/FZ2kJ9TF2qPjgjHf208EUx3ofbqyLDotNFkMNeF mtNRwEcyrWArrCD8yblQl6SRXbG321xGLh8slAu1dqigVCdgB8uMF7ALdqhAERhfFoHZVWmkwPDG eqKXyaDTB2WPTH3gc+CJXp6FpSdnGMnS/Hqiz9JofoVO84/wxms+eKJ/gFXL7Rieig8ceyfkib6S NsMwROeSvgSTSq9CWOhEXdIrs4jCa3ONE4Uz6JI+1QSX9Ek6QXmiznhB4f90XNIn6wh+3yLjCb79 gnFJnyLTSx2y3vOrsfrFgKEwVJuHLumluc7x1B6p/VR9tuAzgNY6NFxKQTe4zweHhmx+jLxejK82 WozPdz/GmWk0UmqWJWuMbGTk2Y+xSSMEVTohuHOt8bYMAD6DtuxvMDwVIIDOyY9RkYirMMF0iWCh 2dwYlxLlyCQrWue2y2RSpje3l3QVrrltkHPb5Topad5gvKm4YJ3b5sw+353b5soMVsflGwIPnD/O bbW5OLfNy6KXtwmF00sjnduu0CmnTzReOT/Hzm3zswjQ21sKJ0AFd27TSlC1ToL2JIyXoAMe3ne3 L5sE9ZNzcG7LRw8oggVI93JjoRP1cquRCaz2gIpvyU7gQvaAqmwrrPVFzkL1gLSgv6QD/dKt5oBe bqst5m2zjABdqwNdebs5oL/i8NsbHBc7DQBdpwO957vmgJ5te8/5hsttBKfrdaBbdpgD+pPi/Z47 vSdz9T6cCOiFOtAn7zYH9AdoyF41gtOLdKBfvscc0DvtHzl/64rk6nI5EdBf1oGeer85oPO0KG8i oBfrQDvvMAf0K7anuUdKnjFCvJfqQD/0I3NAV9q/47nZ+4kRoJfpQL/3sDmgQ/a9nju81xqh01/V gQ792CROOwD0J0aAvlIHeuNjJnHa8X3PDu+1RrTImvQ6/aQ5oHfYH+HuKdlsBKebdaA3PGUO6L0O AH2LEZxeqQM94+9N6mU5/457sGSWywDQq3SgTz9rDuiZtk5fc5nDiCprtQ708RFzQD/s/I/yX1V8 1whOX6MD/egL5oB+0fshecvyE84A0Gt0oM+8ZA5oP3eKnLQsLjEA9LU60PxRc0C/hqB/bgTotTrQ u14xB/Q1JTPsXkdNqQGgW3Sg4yfMAf02x9t9jn8ygtPrdKCXvG4O6FHvRo/f+7QRhqxVB/q2X5sF er/vzjJDQLfpQBe/aRJo7iHfnrKnCyXez9OwW50MtF8GDRPI+zCL1UfeP6tdVjcyUkWvL47A5OdZ 4lt/9iybKdNOaF9NIRaRW6yQ19gQVxGJRAlPVpKtJED6yQAJE4E+t5EIvRumMRrpe5G+C9PQFfQc IEGymWFkJXbvIjd53vSks+86Hfue/Xdz2HfUcZ290XHYiF5Epw701t+ZA3qDDVaVX2VEg7pLB/qF 980BzTnv8vy590MjOH29DvS2D8wBHXD+wPOX3tVG9CLW60CfPm0O6J8i6B8aAXqDDvRPz5gD+kkX gL431w1UJwL6Bh3o2ZYDpoB+33Z58WTbsUIZsjKLCvpGHehF3+i2mgE65Hmes06ejbvGShieCnom PfuX80HVlX9la9c6XuwfCAuwCCC5FqieRqxiCfNaoiibyQIZZiZDYDPZTNLwZzrCzHjkXlMI8y+2 Vt9VZU8ZUa1160A/8UtzQH/bvsJXXyYaMfb7NR1o725zQC/BPuUlRvQpb9KBHr3UHNAHSwD0Xxkx evB1HegXHjUH9P6SsKfbe6sRoDfqQL8cMwf0DARtNQJ0QAc6/gtzqrVnuW5Pi/dBI3R6kw70S8+b A/pKBF1lBOigDnT17eaA3slV22c4IoUCvYJoNjUD0N58/E/Q27dvZxjSNjMjJIpr7yyEvf9FKSF7 LqGN5C8TspsCeG4uIfdsoiVYCG8/KoXF5JRK5MMKgkQJPk4QFZaW5PmABIGAkBNQFxZYwEIDWM4E GQLcTylCj3z94vh8HZ+eBZ5bM8vFiaMn9tdM9+2+10nmV3/8t7U0bBGN6pPf75TlZhdh27gclGVo RJahlwiTo1HCZAmWg4A8nSRoZsi7hO00cIqw/7LiDGFpQ+KwaMpJr7BXgc/Cdv+bamFbJB23MJl9 m2Z2iZx3W2RBLBgVhAjf0ScNsfAS+rteiIodYm+kml8TCRJW3sOPsyuYqCKi/kiWa32ZS/4vNUjW 6yU+hg3K3yn2CzG+VRji26X+QARp0Bnoo/cIe70Y6Q3RXwzBJJ/4eiRaY5T2x/CTFWEhEorhkoEV gZgY43ukKOuotQqJeDQQFuPDiHNVNNAvDEnRzecQYyz+n9zxwH9/3Nbn+8ldlP9zDr8O/H90KuMB vO8jjA8DhPEd5AEKvp8wfgNfkSYWtt8TLHsFAlwp8/Eama+dFsbDjRa2nKgvjb9A00yogPbxaCK+ WRqKbRZJGMJgv4umZd3+qNRLMfOrxLAQ604uL+DbenrEoNDdKdCuLqxN6GabAbAeL98sxKioxLoZ 5WsGpDjmM4nAAr54nxQZ5tfV8O3JHGmal8jY62oXJ+Oq2fmlISHql8RIHOI20He7bp/9FizugHv+ 1aV7e654zgL3ZP+TC66te84C8vYxxb+aXpdNwcrlLIQ5yR2+Xi/QnVK06Pse0LBe+A4pdjnt0U7F uLIG4TFCPxy1Mh5ADCfGAMpOkUNmYUgxmU46W/3+SlJpOUagz3/2bBuuRFxHRMJ4BrHdGAt4c7oo NU0oYakcUomxiimHWdXLDqhXPFblzmsdtY4UwV2xBSQApOZ/rUpVCvRcYGEy9InVlkyDhVuS76EM F9tnUjmD1NQYmdOz4vVUMl2SPFK/Ss2tKJkrvJ1e/DPyaFEjGU5JE76FSvt/9GpEyNFycveWj4Ya CIw+uP+zpeOjoS76Y7nUyt8XI1Vc8L0V7ioxJZbmi6x1QXaxTxpIlWxLMM0TNvd9mdO0yXiVtBcu 3KtJG+5qLFPlOyvO/iygv3r3QdrKg5VNWW1OyyzaHJpGNXca1eoKwlOZLyczyRz6t4DezaFvZ1Ip mESvHP2rJBfLuVmSuVlT7jJTeof1saLjZJuO0pnQMEqd0lLKSillVU0tUv+/slGfUcqWTPvlcSgF klfv/oD8BcpmhMp6JoSsVL8dj3/7JsY/kiIbmUq1TC7VIRyz66rpqOHVjT34uUGpf5MYEUL8qqam ar65ramcagJosJNyjba0aX3ppr8p9FdKETrpEyxSm0x/dvorwbgl1L745G8q6F02zk6kvAoVY1Ym fe6cUpsjp/YtK9jg1s41jRSkMBDnpR6+gxp4YR5PbaWP5qKUX8Gpnkvw56ZPuZRkJpaEsxxC2xwV tiTEKI6rxvh4XyCOVC5Fqrop1RV6e2muLqSzawxp+nA8Gf/9xGT87AS5s8DytCzjmbnDSvXueDK+ P18y3iuX6jiBlKtqampCwkBYGmbkpaxGYwUb+rCNB2JivxgORGGdItv8mBcj9PUwe+2mtgb+OPyz yfYKzk7aunDiFc4g8+V4x95x8r0T49noNzb82oXhLvm9B9P0oDQpX3iTX3uz8HmilAggJVZTSsAu M3FpgA8Lg0IY1+6GcLeraj5CrTdt4MSjYjBOZU/gQxBFGkCDQInFaKRgsWGpoMxORKyUuVKmjUN+ dqGkcojMJSN0ypgUlOnUdGrODLsjJ/TrEX2Aoqe9aCJGItIg26xNXpjKVI3vDwxjiMAHYjDfMSDg XhUoJHIJWWkBPbt6EKEXcXEyNk5GX4mxHXIcD4ayOB4NVhtRpASoWJEj0umI9JsUKbSUAuE4NegI NbabMF4xiVMxeMbU1XEtyP/l14Lcnx8L8sN8WZCZcqmOo3WuAq2gxqFfwh6A1IPWX+GfS+aqlqe5 1Q0XybnfZ4EekAg7aEG/jFLflsyzHPXDK+eZS25L5dyqrIB6kxAfgh5ySOzBnVrifGCAQg8E+6i6 gMlsYhjLiWrnbBqtVTSYS0ocSL1XtpRMR3Ip7dVY2qcoZy6jd7HhWFzoj/GxPikRDvGbqApT/kR6 JdxsJhGNJcT4bpq3kn8lcs5DVFuu8pFLllCxS4ol88gYc9IYe3415kR+NOZAvjRmo1yq4+Sr9K43 2aSEdf4SbFQbgS1dMs0hx/iq/kQsTuuhODCQV6ytoleqjHmIIlVa/qg2FLROqYfULxW99CAHK4nW Xqt2OxeZvBGx/55ih73qxEiQghKpYFLlGRLjfVipDkgxEeueXikQxkaIXNOgSaHtjX4b4WSE0Frw aEpYTmzEqSmtMxlLrZEUuVVbJKm1jWqdbCRX+/Q1xOuyHkfbERfCAngJJCLyxhaxakQsUDokooFe QWlIKBWwFGERuhhfObmklUkErHwl+MahQ63IAEdSWw6OJEa1tubkcCWFXFAHEfUsihp2udJWB3wg NBiIBKl4wxZWydZFNdpLQAo7xfaLNweU+CRbreFMll5BqpTcixxVbD5rdShtLeVLiFOJ6bHWppaS LP3c5LwJKbCcUmAuwX2+EuEA7FJFOTsohQcZowEzVlmDsNWJFNmt8Eqtu7xE2470klQ+aqWUxVZD uDGt3bh9+0n57dtvtOalb/9gvmzwBrlUh8hietdCRU6xsMCUsBjYJIapvRHQ/Mj/HXS6MeZoj3MK /bF+rh37oMAv1ht10hA73tvxz4VP8J71j8vkeGpsNjKgjhiwnitLNQdOXpRfTn47P5x8KF+cvEku 1SEcr2mTGzQaX6z+QHSzEB8IB4ICszJCsC8ihaXeYW33LVaBlC6VeQZWBMZqpuD4hRdD7TSUPXPI m1KZoyUanrswRJsShxwvwW+YjExJ5pDNwmjH8ZTx2SKZsj7C9ld+FilisVqrOrBlB09uoszpwjkb v/Ujy9ojdSQa0lDmbr44xj9gLsXrY/N1ypzKKgnGUrpiQghJaSPqNAybIeGV+RM2jSa/h+5pR1gM CXynGA8LsZR5tezHH/B/JoDZhq+P3PXW9x6H+9NFReRYxjkXGLtvpLocJ31EotdhwpN1pIae20mC hm6moUMkRq/iOPl+ccDRRKkWpX8C0pQnXZR2AomO/6F8TKMmXDufPP4XTOu7x4018eOz5p/v40LO //8BUEsBAhQAFAAAAAgAgT4eK4uEmdMEKwAAANgAABMAAAAAAAAAAAAgALaBAAAAAEVOVU1fbmV1 dHJhbGl0eS5wcHRQSwUGAAAAAAEAAQBBAAAANSsAAAAA --=====================_775924029==_-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Thu Aug 30 10:36:23 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA18512 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:36:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA28921; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:18:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA28890 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:18:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpsrv0.isis.unc.edu (smtpsrv0.isis.unc.edu [152.2.1.139]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA17863 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:16:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sligo (sligo.video.unc.edu [152.2.145.202]) by smtpsrv0.isis.unc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA21844; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:18:01 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <003e01c1315e$943b36c0$ca910298@unc.edu> Reply-To: "Tyler Johnson" From: "Tyler Johnson" To: , "A.M.Rutkowski" References: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel><20010828101753.H64001@demon.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010830075528.02aabb98@exchange.netmagic.com> Subject: Re: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:18:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tony, I want to commend your efforts here. I have been following ENUM on behalf of the Internet2 community for some time. We have a strong interest both in a universal numbering scheme (with associated mapping) and also in a numbering scheme that is not dominated by governmental or commercial interests. I have read the document, but want to re-read it more carefully before offering any technical opinions. However, I believe you have done a service to the community and this Working Group by bringing up some of the most important ramifactions of Enum and doing so in a technical format that is highly consistent with the WG chairs requested protocol. My first question is to ensure my understanding of your proposal: As I read this, you are suggesting a system of categorizing methods of number to address mapping, so that any particular approach can be described in some well know way. However, you are stopping short of defining an actual protocol to describe this categorization electronically. Is such a protocol necessary for automatic internetworking of address resolution systems from different vendors on different networks? Would this allow for multimodal searching/mapping and the ability of a customer/system to combine a variety of different methods into a single service offering? For example: MyNumericAddressTranslationPreference= private LDAP resolution else e164.com else e164.arpa Tyler Miller Johnson University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill ----- Original Message ----- From: A.M.Rutkowski To: Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 7:59 AM Subject: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework > The Internet-Draft is fairly self explanatory. > A visual aid is also attached. > > --tony > > ==================================================================== > Framework for ENUM Neutrality A.M. Rutkowski > Document: VeriSign, Inc > Expires: 1 Mar 2002 29 Aug 2001 > > Framework for ENUM Neutrality > > The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at > http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt > > The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. > > > Abstract > > The pursuit by major national Administrations of declared > policies of ENUM technical and administrative neutrality among > implementations in the marketplace suggest the need for a > framework for such neutrality and a focus on interworking > among them. [1] [2] This document draws upon the ENUM Working > Group archive of discussions as well as public activities in other > standards forums and the marketplace to construct an ENUM options > framework for facilitating neutrality. This framework includes not > only protocol considerations, but also various critical technical > and administrative support functions such as authentication and > ancillary directory services. > ==================================================================== _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 31 10:12:24 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA06186 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:12:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA11725; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:03:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA11694 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:03:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA05957 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:01:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id fntnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:03:34 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010831092003.027976c0@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:03:06 -0400 To: "Tyler Johnson" From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework Cc: enum@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <003e01c1315e$943b36c0$ca910298@unc.edu> References: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel> <20010828101753.H64001@demon.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010830075528.02aabb98@exchange.netmagic.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_863096336==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_863096336==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hi Tyler, >As I read this, you are suggesting a system of categorizing methods of >number to address mapping, so that any particular approach can be described >in some well know way. However, you are stopping short of defining an actual >protocol to describe this categorization electronically. Is such a protocol >necessary for automatic internetworking of address resolution systems from >different vendors on different networks? Would this allow for multimodal >searching/mapping and the ability of a customer/system to combine a variety >of different methods into a single service offering? For example: > > MyNumericAddressTranslationPreference= > private LDAP resolution > else e164.com > else e164.arpa This seems desirable, and seemingly necessary for automatic interworking - although automatic interworking as a universal global goal seems highly unlikely given the diverse impediments that include not only network and application gateways, but also different regulatory and business models, and substantial access management, presence, and privacy variants among customers and cultures. Lastly, but perhaps most significantly, is the inherent multiple levels of indirection encountered in mapping telephone numbers outside of the PSTN that for other than controlled business environments, all but preclude *automatic* use for anything other than IP telephony or LNP without intermediation. A good statement of the problem set can be found in the PAM Specification. The PAM Forum site unfortunately has taken down draft 3 pending the release of the final 1.0 version in a few days, but you can find draft 3 at: http://www.ngi.org/enum/pub/PAMspec_1.0draft3.zip We have not only the reality of the technology and marketplace evolution. The USGOV has declared that ENUM neutrality will exist within its jurisdiction, and conversely the contributions to the ITU-T SG2 meeting over the past few days by some rather compelling administrations make it clear that e164.int or some other variant will likely prevail as the deJure implementation in their jurisdictions. Do you have any ideas for such a searching/mapping capability or is there any Internet2 work that can be leveraged? --tony --=====================_863096336==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Hi Tyler,

As I read this, you are suggesting a system of categorizing methods of
number to address mapping, so that any particular approach can be described
in some well know way. However, you are stopping short of defining an actual
protocol to describe this categorization electronically. Is such a protocol
necessary for automatic internetworking of address resolution systems from
different vendors on different networks? Would this allow for multimodal
searching/mapping and the ability of a customer/system to combine a variety
of different methods into a single service offering? For example:

  MyNumericAddressTranslationPreference=
     private LDAP resolution
     else e164.com
     else e164.arpa

This seems desirable, and seemingly necessary for automatic
interworking - although automatic interworking as a universal
global goal seems highly unlikely given the diverse impediments
that include not only network and application gateways, but
also different regulatory and business models, and substantial
access management, presence, and privacy variants among customers
and cultures. 

Lastly, but perhaps most significantly, is the inherent multiple
levels of indirection encountered in mapping telephone numbers
outside of the PSTN that for other than controlled business
environments, all but preclude *automatic* use for anything
other than IP telephony or LNP without intermediation.

A good statement of the problem set can be found in the PAM
Specification.  The PAM Forum site unfortunately has taken
down draft 3 pending the release of the final 1.0 version in a
few days, but you can find draft 3 at:
http://www.ngi.org/enum/pub/PAMspec_1.0draft3.zip

We have not only the reality of the technology and marketplace
evolution.  The USGOV has declared that ENUM neutrality will
exist within its jurisdiction, and conversely the contributions
to the ITU-T SG2 meeting over the past few days by some rather
compelling administrations make it clear that e164.int or
some other variant will likely prevail as the deJure
implementation in their jurisdictions.

Do you have any ideas for such a searching/mapping capability
or is there any Internet2 work that can be leveraged?

--tony --=====================_863096336==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 31 10:28:56 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA06651 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:28:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA12035; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:17:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA12008 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:17:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA06305 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:16:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.5] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA17450; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:17:06 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:16:39 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: "A.M.Rutkowski" , enum@ietf.org cc: Scott Bradner Subject: Re: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework Message-ID: <3808158.999274599@localhost> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010830075528.02aabb98@exchange.netmagic.com> References: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel> <20010828101753.H64001@demon.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010830075528.02aabb98@exchange.netmagic.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > This document is an Internet-Draft and is NOT offered in > accordance with Section 10 of RFC2026, and the author does not > provide the IETF with any rights other than to publish as an > Internet-Draft. According to the rules on IPR rules specified in RFC 2026, this draft presented by Tony can not be discussed in this working group until a new version is published with an appropriate IPR statement. I.e. a document which is not offered in accordance with Section 10 of RFc 2026 can not be part of the work of a working group in the IETF. As this mailing list is the mailing list for a working group, the document can not be discussed here. Patrik Faltstrom co-chair of the ENUM working group in the IETF _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 31 10:57:16 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07286 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:57:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA13367; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:49:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA13338 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:49:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.idashes.net ([128.242.193.178]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07110 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:48:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from Cartman [66.36.28.106] by mail.idashes.net (SMTPD32-7.00) id A3A6506007E; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:48:06 -0400 From: "Pat Conley" To: "Tyler Johnson" , , "A.M.Rutkowski" Subject: RE: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:51:59 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <003e01c1315e$943b36c0$ca910298@unc.edu> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tyler asks... Is such a protocol necessary for automatic internetworking of address resolution systems from different vendors on different networks? One possible mechanism for "address resolution vendors" to broadcast information about the service is UDDI. This is a system through which web services are advertised on the network. See www.uddi.org for more information. pat -----Original Message----- From: enum-admin@ietf.org [mailto:enum-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Tyler Johnson Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:18 AM To: enum@ietf.org; A.M.Rutkowski Subject: Re: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework Tony, I want to commend your efforts here. I have been following ENUM on behalf of the Internet2 community for some time. We have a strong interest both in a universal numbering scheme (with associated mapping) and also in a numbering scheme that is not dominated by governmental or commercial interests. I have read the document, but want to re-read it more carefully before offering any technical opinions. However, I believe you have done a service to the community and this Working Group by bringing up some of the most important ramifactions of Enum and doing so in a technical format that is highly consistent with the WG chairs requested protocol. My first question is to ensure my understanding of your proposal: As I read this, you are suggesting a system of categorizing methods of number to address mapping, so that any particular approach can be described in some well know way. However, you are stopping short of defining an actual protocol to describe this categorization electronically. Is such a protocol necessary for automatic internetworking of address resolution systems from different vendors on different networks? Would this allow for multimodal searching/mapping and the ability of a customer/system to combine a variety of different methods into a single service offering? For example: MyNumericAddressTranslationPreference= private LDAP resolution else e164.com else e164.arpa Tyler Miller Johnson University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill ----- Original Message ----- From: A.M.Rutkowski To: Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 7:59 AM Subject: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework > The Internet-Draft is fairly self explanatory. > A visual aid is also attached. > > --tony > > ==================================================================== > Framework for ENUM Neutrality A.M. Rutkowski > Document: VeriSign, Inc > Expires: 1 Mar 2002 29 Aug 2001 > > Framework for ENUM Neutrality > > The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at > http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt > > The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. > > > Abstract > > The pursuit by major national Administrations of declared > policies of ENUM technical and administrative neutrality among > implementations in the marketplace suggest the need for a > framework for such neutrality and a focus on interworking > among them. [1] [2] This document draws upon the ENUM Working > Group archive of discussions as well as public activities in other > standards forums and the marketplace to construct an ENUM options > framework for facilitating neutrality. This framework includes not > only protocol considerations, but also various critical technical > and administrative support functions such as authentication and > ancillary directory services. > ==================================================================== _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 31 10:58:08 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07319 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:58:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA13413; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:49:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA13380 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:49:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cisco.com (nordic.cisco.com [64.103.48.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07119 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:48:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.5] (ssh-ams1.cisco.com [144.254.74.55]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA24933; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:49:14 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:48:31 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , "A.M.Rutkowski" , enum@ietf.org cc: Scott Bradner Subject: Re: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework Message-ID: <3922897.999276511@localhost> In-Reply-To: <3808158.999274599@localhost> References: <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel> <20010828101753.H64001@demon.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010830075528.02aabb98@exchange.netmagic.com> <3808158.999274599@localhost> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id KAA13381 Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --On 2001-08-31 16.16 +0200 Patrik Fältström wrote: >> This document is an Internet-Draft and is NOT offered in >> accordance with Section 10 of RFC2026, and the author does not >> provide the IETF with any rights other than to publish as an >> Internet-Draft. > > According to the rules on IPR rules specified in RFC 2026, this draft > presented by Tony can not be discussed in this working group until a new > version is published with an appropriate IPR statement. > > I.e. a document which is not offered in accordance with Section 10 of RFc > 2026 can not be part of the work of a working group in the IETF. > > As this mailing list is the mailing list for a working group, the document > can not be discussed here. I was a bit too fast (pointed out by our AD). It can be discussed, but can not be part of a wg effort. Remember the "Note-Well" message sent to this list and others (and also distributed at the IETF). Patrik co-chair of the working group _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 31 11:03:22 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA07407 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:03:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA13606; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:55:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA13566 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:55:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchange.netmagic.com ([63.221.166.162]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07242 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:54:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [216.168.224.9] by exchange.netmagic.com (NTMail 5.06.0016/NT2627.00.5ef58ba0) with ESMTP id wntnaaaa for enum@ietf.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:55:58 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010831104658.027dcd18@mail.netmagic.com> X-Sender: amr@mail.netmagic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 10:55:30 -0400 To: Patrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4ltstr=F6m?= , enum@ietf.org From: "A.M. Rutkowski" Subject: Re: [Enum] New I-D on ENUM Neutrality Framework Cc: Scott Bradner In-Reply-To: <3808158.999274599@localhost> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010830075528.02aabb98@exchange.netmagic.com> <04c601c12eeb$7e8433b0$48d348d3@abel> <20010828101753.H64001@demon.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20010830075528.02aabb98@exchange.netmagic.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_2618595==_.ALT" Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org --=====================_2618595==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Hi Patrik, >I.e. a document which is not offered in accordance with Section 10 of RFc >2026 can not be part of the work of a working group in the IETF. > >As this mailing list is the mailing list for a working group, the document >can not be discussed here. You can always discuss anything here that is relevant. Indeed, the Internet-Draft submission guidelines specifically provide for the text that was used. If there was any doubt on the subject, the author's copyright statement here conveys the intellectual property to the entire world for any and every purpose. The type of statement is only relevant if the I-D proceeds to some more formal status within the IETF, and if that should occur, subsequent versions can certainly contain any necessary statement. --tony --=====================_2618595==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Hi Patrik,

I.e. a document which is not offered in accordance with Section 10 of RFc
2026 can not be part of the work of a working group in the IETF.

As this mailing list is the mailing list for a working group, the document
can not be discussed here.

You can always discuss anything here that is relevant.  Indeed,
the Internet-Draft submission guidelines specifically provide
for the text that was used.  If there was any doubt on the
subject, the author's copyright statement here conveys the
intellectual property to the entire world for any and every purpose.

The type of statement is only relevant if the I-D proceeds to
some more formal status within the IETF, and if that should
occur, subsequent versions can certainly contain any necessary
statement.

--tony --=====================_2618595==_.ALT-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From enum-admin@ietf.org Fri Aug 31 11:44:12 2001 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA08165 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:44:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA15277; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:36:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA15245 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:36:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com [171.71.163.10]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA07990 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:34:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-av-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-av-1.cisco.com [171.69.11.130]) by sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (8.11.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id f7VFZpp16632 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sj-msg-av-1.cisco.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f7VFZs519928 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:35:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CHSHARP-W2K1.cisco.com (rtp-vpn-131.cisco.com [10.82.192.131]) by mailman.cisco.com (8.9.3/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id IAA02356 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:35:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010831112649.01c479c8@dogwood.cisco.com> X-Sender: chsharp@dogwood.cisco.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:35:08 -0400 To: enum@ietf.org From: Chip Sharp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Enum] criteria and procedures for registering ENUM domains Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org I've posted a new I-D this week that might be of interest to the list. "Criteria and procedures for registering domains corresponding to E.164 Country Codes in e164.arpa " http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sharp-enum-cc-registration-00.txt "Abstract This document describes criteria and procedures for registering domains corresponding to E.164 Country Codes in e164.arpa as defined in RFC2916." There are some things in it that need to be fixed and I've already written up version 01, but I figured if there was other basic feedback, I could include other changes at the same time. The following are the list of changes for v.01 that I have so far: * Fixed the Copyright Statement. I mistakenly uploaded version 00 with a truncated Copyright Statement. * Fixed a few Windows-specific quote marks that were left in the document. (I've found again that Notepad does not catch these mistakes. I really have to remember to review with emacs.) * In the Conventions section (1), clarified that domain names used in the document are fully qualified domain names. * In the Conventions section (1), in the paragraph on "assignee", added text clarifying that the procedure is defined in E.164.1, not in this document. * In the Scope, in the paragraph on Resolution 20, I made the text describing the registrar procedures into a new paragraph and removed "Similarly" to avoid the potential mistaken impression that this document implies that the Resolution 20 procedures apply to e164.arpa. * In the General Principles section, in the discussion of sub-domains for different types of Country Codes I added a reference to E.164.1 since it defines the different types of Country Codes. For Geographic Areas and Global Services, I modified the text to make it clear that registration for sub-domains is outside the scope of this document (I know I'm being somewhat repetitive here. Consider it a form of FEC.). * In the General Principles section, in the last paragraph describing removing domains, I added a reference to E.164.1 since E.164.1 defines what it means to reclaim a Country Code. This also tries to make clear that reclamation of Country Codes is yet another thing that is outside the scope of this document. Chip _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum