You are here: Home > Participate > Join a Discussion > Mailman Archives
<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: ETSI on Minimum Requirements for European ENUM Trials

  • To: Richard Shockey < >
  • From: Jim Reid < >
  • Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:28:08 -0700
  • Cc: "Marco Bernardi" < >
    "David Conrad" < >
    "Stastny Richard" < >

>>>>> "Richard" == Richard Shockey richard@localhost writes:

    Richard> Though these are all interesting topics .. the simple
    Richard> fact of the matter is that most of the companies and
    Richard> participants in the EC trials will have limited resources
    Richard> and the goals and objectives of the trials will have to
    Richard> be limited in scope to the resources available to them.

Sure, and things will have to be prioritised too.

    Richard> "Eyes on the Prize" Jim ...  in this case it is not DNSSEC
    Richard> and IPV6 deployment, however wonderful those goals are.

Richard, you seem to be putting words in my mouth. I do not have
DNSSEC deployment as the prize. For the trials, the objectives should
be to evaluate the components that are expected to exist in a
production ENUM service and gain operational experience with them. IMO
this has to include DNSSEC.

I believe an ENUM trial that cannot protect against DNS spoofing is
flawed and may wreck industry/consumer confidence in ENUM. That would
be very bad. "Eyes on the Prize" and all that. If users and developers
cannot rely on the underlying infrastructure, what's the point, even
in a trial? I can't imagine a telco or regulator, let alone the end
users, being happy for ENUM trials to be wide open for the evil things
that would be possible as a result of DNS spoofing.

    Richard> Austria ( as examples) , etal do not have unlimited
    Richard> resources for a indepth analysis of all these interesting
    Richard> issues .._at this time_.

I wasn't expecting ENUM trials to provide an in-depth analysis of all
these issues. I do however want/expect them to be evaluated as far as
is practical and sensible. Hopefully we both agree on that even if our
definitions of "practical" and "sensible" are not aligned. :-) And if
theer are several trials, there could be enough of a critical mass of
resources to make them more meaningful, for instance by not
duplicating work that's already being done elsewhere. ie The sum of
the parts is greater than just adding them all up.

  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>