RIPE 50

RIPE Meeting: 50
Working Group: ENUM
Status: Final
Revision Number: 1

Minutes - RIPE 50
ENUM Working Group

------------------------------------------
Date: Thursday 5 May 2005
Location: Stockholm
Chair: Patrik Fältström [Cisco]
Co-chair: Kim Davies [CENTR]

Scribe: Oleg Muravskiy [RIPE NCC]
------------------------------------------

Agenda

A. IETF Update Patrik Fältström

B. Trials and Deployments

B1. UK (+44) ENUM Development Jim Reid

B2. Austrian (+43) ENUM Deployment Otmar Lendl

B3. Swedish (+46) ENUM Deployment Joakim Strålmark

B4. Irish (+353) ENUM Status Niall O'Reilly

C. Administrative Matters

Z. AOB

------------------------------------------ 14:01 Kim Davies

Welcome everyone, we're starting.

A. IETF Update (Slides not on web site, yet) Speaker: Patrik Fältström

B1. UK ENUM Update
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50-enum-uk.pdf
Speaker: Jim Reid [DNS MODA]

Discussion:

Otmar Lendl [enum.at]: Who provides SIPs in your implementation Jim:
Telco's

B2. ENUM Validatiion in +43
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50-enum-43.pdf
Speaker: Otmar Lendl [enum.at]

Discussion:

Robert Schafer [MCI]: Are there any fundamental requirements to
enforce validation?

Otmar: In Austria there are governmental regulations regarding this.

Niall O'Reilly [University College Dublin]: Is the source code for
validation plug-ins available to public?

Otmar: Yes, source and documentation are on our website, and you could
also contact me directly for additional information.

Andrew Newton [VeriSign]: How is token validation implemented?

Otmar: We only define the protocol between us and the telco's. Token
generation is a different problem space.

Presentation: +43 780 ENUM meets PSTN
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50-enum-43.pdf
(Slide 20 onwards) Speaker: Otmar Lendl

Discussion:

Robert Schafer [MCI]: You said originating side has to be on PSTN?

Otmar: No, neither side has to be on PSTN, but when destination is a
+43 780 number, then it's definitely on ENUM.

Niall: There could be islands of SIP providers with partial ENUM
implementation, which might cause routing problems.

Otmar: We have top-level Austrian preferred ENUM gateway, that will be
used if none of SIPs could terminate call to ENUM themselfs.

B3. Status of ENUM in Sweden
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50-enum-sweden.pdf.pdf
Speaker: Joakim Strålmark

B4. +353 ENUM Status
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50-enum-353.pdf
Speaker: Niall O'Reilly

Discussion:

- What is your experience with DNAME resolving?

Niall: the whole block for my university is delegated as DNAME, and I
had no problems.

Jim: Not all resolvers support DNAME, and thus could not map it to
CNAME query.

Niall: So I've been lucky.

C1. New chairs

Patrik: There is a proposal to swap the chair and co-chair of WG, who
actually were unable to dedicate a lot of time to this assignment, by
people who could and wish to do so. The candidates are Niall O'Reilly
as a chair, and Carsten Schiefner as a co-chair. Any
questions/concerns?

- Does Carsten still works for the RIPE NCC?

Patrik: No, this week he started a job with a new employer, that's why
he could not attend the meeting.

--No objections--

Patrik: proposal accepted.

C2. What we suppose to do?

Patrik: There are working groups related to ENUM within other
organisations, like IETF. The question is what our WG is for, what we
are supposed to do?

From the beginning it was founded as a group to exchange operational
experience. So now we have a mailing list, a web page moderated by Kim
with a listing of all operational activities in ENUM, we have these
meetings. We provided no "official" RIPE documents so far.

Question is: is it OK? Should we continue the same way? Or should we
cancel this WG?

--It is OK, we will continue--

Z. AOB

Announcement: ETSI ENUM Plugtest Announcement

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50-enum-etsi-plugtest.pdf
Speaker: Jim Reid