Re: [Enum] Now that carrier enum is seperate, will user enum ever be deployed?

[lconroy <lconroy at insensate.co.uk>]

Hi Michael,
  good to see your posting.
Another (converse) view is that:
-  an "enlightened" originating provider might want to try both to
   see if they can find an IP termination to save on termination  
charges.
-  some providers rather like getting termination charges, and are not
   enthusiastic about publishing SIP URLs so that other providers can
   avoid paying (or seeing ENUM . If the end user/registrant publishes
   a reachable SIP URL, then their terminating provider may not need
   to be enthusiastic/aware/involved/...
   From the end user/registrant perspective, it could be like having a
   LoCall/Free phone number (if there are enough "enlightened"  
providers.

That's the <large financial amount> question.

Given that a certain carrier spent over 10 years noticing that some
competitor-originated calls were (allegedly) taking "non-optimal"
routes across the US, you might think that every carrier would jump
at the chance of saving call costs, but I couldn't possibly comment.

all the best,
  Lawrence

On 11 Aug 2005, at 13:28, Michael Mealling wrote:
> Apologies for missing the discussion but after reading
> draft-haberler-carrier-enum I'm curious whether the discussion got to
> whether or not this would cause user enum to never be deployed in any
> useful level? It would seem that by seperating the two the pressure is
> off of the carriers to implement the rest of the tree?
>
> -MM


_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
enum at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum