[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Enum] IETF, ENUM and NGN
> AFAICT nobody is suggesting Infrastructure and User ENUM would use the
> same tree. The constraints and data models for these things are
> completely different. However some people seem to think that if these
> two flavours of ENUM use the same domain name, this means they both
> have to use the same tree with one model for ownership, administration
> and delegation. That doesn't necessarily follow. What some operator
> does with its private, internal-use-only version of e164.arpa and how
> they populate and manage that is nobody else's concern, apart from the
> usual regulatory issues like universal service obligations, fair
> competition and so on.
Yes it is - as soon, as you start getting complaints from cutomers of
this operator like "why did you put into the e164.arpa. records
which routed me to such expensive path?"
I'd be quite interested what will be your reaction, if someone makes
a "private" tree overlaying the .UK TLD with any sort of (possibly invalid)
data.
Generally, using the same domain name for completely different purposes is
IMHO _very_ bad idea. There's absolutely no problem to avoid this by
agreeing on different domain name - and for completely private purposes
even non-existent TLD like e164.nxd. could be used which definitely can't
be reached from the public internet.
With kind regards,
M.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---- ----
---- Marian Durkovic network manager ----
---- ----
---- Slovak Technical University Tel: +421 2 524 51 301 ----
---- Computer Centre, Nam. Slobody 17 Fax: +421 2 524 94 351 ----
---- 812 43 Bratislava, Slovak Republic E-mail/sip: md at bts.sk ----
---- ----
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
enum at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum