Re: ENUM domain hijack an already unlawful wiretap?, enum-l@localhost, enum-trial@localhost
- Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 13:51:07 +0100
At 12:47 29.02.2004, James Seng wrote:
James, we're coming from the same angle.
are there problems/issues with enum/sip? yes.
do we want to fix them by imposing regulation? i rather not.
I'd happily run an ENUM registry which just hands out new numbers+ENUM
domains and contractually follows the existing domain name model - (not
because we'd just love to be a telco/number range holder, but because the
existing service number allocation system doesnt scale and it doesnt make
sense to separate the processes). In terms of regulation all that needs to
be done is a little knob-twisting on the service number allocation process
The tough (=cost driving) part is existing numbers with their fuzzy
ownership model. Once you near production service, you need to adress the
loopholes, and there are different approaches - new regulation predicated
on the users divine right to stupidity ;) or - and that was my point -
maybe the issue can be mitigated by clarification wrt existing law. There
is clearly a tradeoff between the onus you put on a subscriber and the onus
put on the ENUM validation system - very similar to the direct and indirect
methods of number allocation.
The cleanest solution would be to adopt the domain model altogether and
separate number management & ownership registration completely from network
service and drive phone book (aka "E.164 whois"), PSTN service, number
portability and ENUM from such a converged number database. Very light on
validation regulation, great for customers, but not all market participants
would share the visison without some serious prodding..