Re: New number ranges for E.164
- Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 11:54:45 +0000
>>>>> "Adrian" == Adrian Georgescu ag@localhost writes:
Adrian> One of the ideas presented at the Workshop was the use of
Adrian> a dedicated number range for Voice over IP. One might
Adrian> object to this by saying that the current numbering plans
Adrian> do not allow creation of so many new numbers. But again
Adrian> the main purpose of ENUM is to help the convergence. The
Adrian> telephone numbers as we know them today will disappear on
Adrian> the long term and will be replaced by friendly names
Adrian> (email addresses, buddy names, aliases easy to remember
Adrian> and such).
I don't share your enthusiasm for the end of telephone numbers as we
know them. There are billions of handsets that only have a keypad. Or
even a rotary dialler. These aren't going to go away any time soon.
They're also easy to use. I wonder how you'd get on with a smart
telephone device in say Japan that only had a user interface that
understood Japanese and didn't have a keypad because "telephone
numbers are obsolete".
Adrian> It could very well be that there is no need to plan a
Adrian> scheme where everyone will use an ENUM number.
I very much doubt this. [If it's true, why are the telcos looking very
closely at operator ENUM?] It's a bit like saying everybody will have
IPv6 addresses and there will be no need for "legacy" IPv4. That's
theoretically true, but it ignores reality.
As you said earlier, convergence is the goal here. That means dealing
with the existing PSTN and the billions of telephone numbers it uses.
The early adopters of ENUM are likely to be enterprises who will use
it to route calls over their corporate intranet (or even the internet)
using SIP and VoIP. This will mean dealing with current E.164 numbers:
nobody is going to renumber their phones to a dedicated ENUM range
just so they can exploit ENUM.
Adrian> Should regulators in each country consider assigning a
Adrian> dedicated number range (see Japan example), there will be
Adrian> no need to authenticate/validate new requests.
Nope. Authentication and validation will still be necessary --
provided the regulator insists on this of course. All that would
change is the nature of how a&v was implemented. Hopefully this
would be to something simpler/cheaper/etc, but that can't be assumed.
IIUC, I can get a personal number in the 07000 range in the UK today.
However proving I have the right to that number isn't easy.
