About RIPE | Contact  | Search | Sitemap    
Homepage RIPE  
RIPE Community Mail Archives
search  
     
RIPE Navigation Ends
About RIPE Maillists
Maillists Archive
Global Lists
Non Active Lists
RIPE NCC Navigation Ends
Next Section
<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: [enum-wg] COCOM & ENUM ...

  • To: Richard Shockey < >
  • From: Andrzej Bartosiewicz < >
  • Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:53:52 +0100 (CET)
  • Cc: "Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP)" < >
    Jim Reid < >
    Stastny Richard < >
    Carsten Schiefner < >
  • Virusprotection: checked - Found to be clean

Richard,

> This IMHO will cause Poland a problem over time as ISP who want to sell
> advanced services then realize they have to go through the incumbent to get
> registrations processed. But this is as we all know is a national matter
> and seeing how Poland deals with this will be very interesting to watch.

Are you a fortune-teller? We already have this problem!
For example some of our ISP (and acting as ".pl" Registrars too) are
interested in ENUM domains registration (for VoIP services) but they MUST go
through TSPs. And telcos are not interested to start ENUM domains
registration... (they are also slowing down the NP implementation, so nobody
expects special interest in ENUM).

> Authentication is not hard if your country has independent databases that
> can confirm the number holder. North America will not have that problem.

We do not have the independent database in Poland.

> Or they could use existing LNP databases ... ( ok that sounds really self
> serving )
>
> Note here 70% of US consumers who switch to Cable Based VoIP telephony
> actually port their primary number.

In Poland we have NP only in the Law (since July 2004), not in operation :(

Andrzej.



<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>
 

Next Section
     About RIPE | Site Map | LIR Portal | About the RIPE NCC | Contact | © RIPE Community. All rights reserved.
RIPE.NET Homepage LIR Portal RIPE Community