[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Enum] Carrier ENUM mini-BoF Agenda
Stastny and all,
Stastny Richard wrote:
> >1a: What are the issues/problems that need to be addressed?
> >1b: What are the reasons that "Public" ENUM can't solve them?
>
> Regarding "Public" ENUM, I would like to ask that the list agrees
> on the following common understanding of "Public" ENUM:
>
> Based on the following already mentioned statement in RFC3761
>
> "Holders of E.164 numbers which want to be listed in DNS
> should contact the appropriate zone administrator according
> to the policy which is attached to the zone."
Yes and this indicates that the zone management will be making
this decision, with or without the consent of the users or any single
user. Therefore this is insufficient, which I have been trying to
get across here... Oh, and BTW, a "Consensus" is also not
appropriate for which the zone management to declare without
being able to demonstrate that a "Consensus" is accompanied
by a vote of the participating zone users...
>
>
> 1. NAPTRs in "Public" DNS shall be accessible, retrievable and
> interpretable by anybody without restriction.
This needs to be changed for obvious privacy reasons.
>
> 2 currently most zone policies define the holder of the E.164
> number as the end-user,
Most, but not all. And all is what is needed..
>
> 3. therefore it is the end-users decision to be listed in ENUM (opt-in);
> or at least his approval is required.
No that is not what is said or even inferred...
>
> 4. the end-user has either direct or indirect influence on
> the content of the NAPTRs
Direct is necessary.
>
>
> If there is a requirement to implement ENUM in a different way
> by any entity or confederation of entities, especially with a
> different policy incompatible with the policy of the appropriate
> zone administrator (in e164.arpa in most cases the ITU-T and the
> NRAs), this may be done in any kind of different tree and is
> called operator, carrier or infrastructure ENUM (it would
> also be nice to agree on one name)
>
> I could offer to present the current European (ETSI) position
> if I am given a 10 min slot.
>
> >2. Requirements for a solution without a specific recommendation on what
> >that technology may or may not be appropriate.
>
> I cannot completely parse this sentence, could anybody
> elaborate please:
I really couldn't either...
>
>
> Richard
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Richard Shockey [mailto:richard at shockey.us]
> Gesendet: Sa 19.06.2004 22:15
> An: enum at ietf.org
> Cc: James Seng; Stastny Richard; paf at cisco.com
> Betreff: Re: [Enum] A note from your chairs on the Agenda for IETF 60 including this discussion on Carrier ENUM - Addendum
>
>
>
> At
>
> >The second hour will then shift to a discussion of Carrier -
> >Infrastructure ENUM ( what ever you want to call it ) That discussion will
> >be led by James Seng and Richard Stastny with myself providing continuity
> >and context to the existing work.
> >
> >Individuals wishing to make formal ID contributions and or requesting time
> >to speak on Carrier ENUM discussions are requested to get your ID
> >documentation in a soon a possible and request time from the mini-BOF chairs.
> >
>
>
> I should have added to this note that the Carrier ENUM mini-BOF should be
> limited to a discussion of :
>
> 1. The problem statement. To this end I'm reminded of Steve Lind's succinct
> proposal
>
> 1a: What are the issues/problems that need to be addressed?
> 1b: What are the reasons that "Public" ENUM can't solve them?
>
> 2. Requirements for a solution without a specific recommendation on what
> that technology may or may not be appropriate.
>
>
>
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives
> NeuStar Inc.
> 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166
> sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org ENUM +87810-13313-31331
> PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683, Fax: +1 815.333.1237
> <mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz>
> <http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org>
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Part 1.2 Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
> Encoding: 7bit
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
Pierre Abelard
"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827
_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
enum at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum