Re: AW: AW: [enum-wg] Kapsch CarrierCom first company to be reached with ENUM (questionable)

["Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP)" <]

Hi Christoph,
  You say 3762, I say 3764. I'll leave the religious wars to someone 
else.

However -  Congratulations!
You have managed to find an Enumservice syntax for your NAPTRs that
I haven't seen before:  E2U+h323:voice

Looking at the code, I suspect that this will successfully break 
Asterisk's
enum.c processing.

all the best,
  Lawrence



On 8 Oct 2004, at 11:10, Christoph Künkel wrote:

Lawrence,

add just any extension to the trunk base number, e.g. 0.9.0.0.3.7.1.3.0.7.9.4.e164.arpa. See the NAPTR.

However, I think you missed my point(s). I was not going to debate wether I have a NAPTR or not. I was just trying to make the point that the original thread implied a tight coupling between ENUM and SIP, where there is none. And that Kapsch certainly is not the first company to be reached with ENUM.

:-) Christoph

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP) [

]

Do I miss something or is this thread falsely mixing up only loosely
coupled issues?

Yes, you do miss something.