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

[Richard Shockey <]

At 02:57 PM 12/14/2004, Jim Reid wrote:

> >>>>> "Richard" == Richard Shockey richard@localhost writes:
>
>     >> Carrier-based ENUM is probably the easiest (maybe not the best)
>     >> way to protect the privacy of customer data.
>
>     Richard> Which BTW is why it is a good idea to keep it out of
>     Richard> e164.arpa
>
> EH? The choice of domain name has no impact on whether that bit of the
> name space is public. Or private. It's all down to what data goes on
> what name servers and where those name servers are located (or accept
> queries from).
Yes but that is not the issue here ..none of this is about the DNS.  This 
all about policies and procedures of who can write authoritative records 
that represent mappings from TN's to URI's and why. Its all political not 
technical but we've known that from the beginning. Its just now carriers 
have switched to caffinated coffee and realized VoIP is no toy but a real 
and direct threat to their revenue steams and more importantly its 
important to their customers.  1/2 of all PBX's sold in North America were 
VoIP enabled. The must act or their land line businesses will be rendered 
useless.

How many times has Skype been downloaded?

Again I'm very sympathetic to the problem and would like to help design 
solutions for carriers that address their needs but at the same time I dont 
want the fundamental technical architecture of 3761 to be corrupted by 
requirements that place the square pegs of carrier network needs in the 
round holes of e164.arpa.



>     Richard> ..maybe the carriers will go back to the ITU and get
>     Richard> e164.int and we can end this issue once and for all.
>
> Hmm... How long do you think it would take ITU to set up processes and
> cost-recovery mechanisms for this? IIUC ITU has still not decided
> whether ENUM should be anchored in the public e164.arpa infrastructure
> or a new TLD owned and operated by ITU.
Well the arpa issue as far as I can see is essentially over. No one in 
North America aka CC1 is going to countence to ITU control here unless they 
want to do something seperately for the carriers.

and how long would it take to set something up ... Oh the ITU is definitely 
looking for work these days and I'm constantly amazed at the speed the ITU 
will act if ..if they set their minds to something.

If the ITU proposed setting up e164.int for global service provider needs 
I'd be the first to support the proposition.


> According to IANA, it's the IANA registry that manages .int, not the
> ITU. BTW the DNS infrastructure for .int is nowhere near the levels of
> robustness and global presence that .arpa has.
That too can be fixed ..


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives
NeuStar Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza  -   Sterling, VA  20166
sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org   sip:57141@localhost
ENUM +87810-13313-31331
PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683,  Fax: +1 815.333.1237
<mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz>
<http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<