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

Re: ENUM trials in general

  • To: "Sabine Dolderer/Denic" < >
  • From: Jim Reid < >
  • Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 06:19:15 -0800
  • Cc:

>>>>> "Sabine" == Sabine Dolderer/Denic dolderer@localhost writes:

    Sabine> You have to differentiate between mandatory and voluntary
    Sabine> whois-service= . And while I agree that a mandatory
    Sabine> whois-service is especially because of data privacy laws
    Sabine> impossible, I still think that = there are good arguments
    Sabine> to provide - at least whithin the trials - a voluntary
    Sabine> service for trial participants to identify potenti= al
    Sabine> test partners.

Isn't identifying possible test partners something that should fall
out of the traffic on enum-trials@localhost Maybe I'm missing
something -- not having drunk enough coffee yet today -- because I
can't see how that info could be obtained from whois servers which may
or may not exist in national trials.

BTW, the using SRV records draft to find whois servers isn't likely to
help much because there two search schemes, each with advantages and
disadvantages. A bottom-up search strategy is likely to give more
specific answers but is also more susceptible to spoofing and lies
from fake whois servers. The top-down approach is less likely to be
spoofed but may not give specific information: eg "this number is in a
range belonging to Deutsche Telekom in Berlin". The DNS WG at RIPE
could not reach consensus on which of these was better or worse than
the other.

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