[enum-wg] Follow up on Jim Reid's presentation - CRUE and relation to IETF work
Jim Reid jim at rfc1035.com
Sun Apr 30 21:23:40 CEST 2006
> we're all very very eager to hear and discuss your most helpful > contributions. > > Help make the world a better place and stamp out such badly flawed > drafts. > > To do so, please: > > a) detail your concerns on the IETF ENUM WG list (that's where this > stuff > is being discussed) > b) in time (that is, like half a year ago, but late adopters welcome) > c) including facts, so you actually convince people > d) [optional] make a better proposal (those which yield a really > loud hum). I have done a, b, and c already on the IETF mailing list and will be happy to do so again. > I'll support you on your superior superior proposal. You'll have a very long wait because it's not clear to me what the actual problem is or what its requirements are. And yes, I know you have a list of requirements in the draft. But they don't define what problem space(s) fit them. That said, it is clear that your draft can't be the answer because it combines two mutually exclusive concepts -- User ENUM and Infrastructure ENUM -- on the same infrastructure.
[ enum-wg Archives ]