RE: [Enum] A proposal for Carrier ENUM

["James McEachern" <jmce at nortel.com>]

Paul,
I realize you asked to halt this thread, but I have one question for clarification.  Rather than "specifying that the entity populating Carrier ENUM be the one providing PSTN service to the number in question", wouldn't it make more sense to specify that the entity populating Carrier ENUM be the one authorized by the national regulator to populate Carrier ENUM for the number in question?

Based on the previous discussion I can imagine that in some circumstances it might be advantageous for the regulator to have the donor carrier populate Carrier ENUM.  If it truly is up to the national regulator, perhaps we should simply recognize this, rather than presume what the regulator will decide?

Jim


-----Original Message-----
From: enum-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:enum-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rosbotham, Paul
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 3:03 PM
To: enum at ietf.org
Cc: james.f.baskin at verizon.com
Subject: RE: [Enum] A proposal for Carrier ENUM

As Chair of the UK group that's looking at NP solutions in the NGN era, I'm going to ask that we call a halt to this particular thread because, as Jim says in his final paragraph it is one which is clearly a national matter (no offence Jim, I realise you're only trying to help).  

Should carrier ENUM come to fruition, it could well form the nucleus of the central database that is used for NP in the UK : however, it is premature to determine this, and once again this is clearly a national matter.

As I outlined earlier in the week, I don't believe that IETF need go any further than specifying that the entity populating Carrier ENUM be the one providing PSTN service to the number in question.

Regards

Paul Rosbotham
Manager, Interconnect Strategy & Technology Regulation
Cable & Wireless plc

Tel :	+44 1772 451506
Mob :	+44 7957 805573


-----Original Message-----
From: enum-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:enum-bounces at ietf.org]On Behalf Of
james.f.baskin at verizon.com
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 6:58 PM
To: enum at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Enum] A proposal for Carrier ENUM


In the UK number portability model, perhaps the donor operator _should_ 
be the carrier-of-record for carrier ENUM.  The donor is, after all, 
the only carrier known to PSTN routing databases for a ported number. 

This could actually work in reasonable ways. 

(1) The donor could populate carrier ENUM with direct pointers to 
    recipient operators' gateways.  Thus, for calls from originating 
    carriers who choose to do a carrier ENUM query, the donor operator 
    could avoid having to handle the prefix and re-injection function.

(2) The recipient operator could use End-user ENUM to populate any 
    other NAPTRs that it might determine to be useful (this would 
    require end-user opt-in, but that could be obtained as part of the 
    original porting transaction.) 

(3) Carrier ENUM could be used to build a number portability database 
    that could eventually eliminate the donor operator's (unwanted and 
    costly?) involvement in PSTN call routing for ported numbers. 

Determination of which party is the carrier-of-record (PSTN POI) is a 
national matter.  Some countries could use the donor model, and others 
could use different models.  The IETF should design Carrier ENUM to work 
regardless and independent of the national carrier-of-record decision.

Jim Baskin


Clive Feather wrote:

>Pfautz, Penn L, NEO said:
>> Nonetheless, I do think that for the most part it will be possible to
>> determine who the carrier providing the PSTN point of interface for an
>> E.164 number is and thus the carrier-of-record for carrier ENUM. If 
this
>> information were not generally available the E.164 number would not be
>> of much use anyway.
>
>In the UK model, the national call routeing system points at the "donor
>operator". Calls are routed to that operator, who then adds a prefix to 
the
>number - pointing at the terminating operator - and re-injects the call
>into the network to be re-routed. Thus to identify the carrier providing
>the PSTN point of interface:
>(1) You need to identify the donor operator.
>(2) You need to ask the donor operator to indicate whether the number has
>    been ported and, if so, who the recipient operator is.
>
>It's (2) that's the hard bit, because there is no mechanism for it and no
>commercial or regulatory imperative to create one.



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

This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the Cable & Wireless e-mail security system - powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive managed e-mail security service,  visit http://www.cw.com/uk/emailprotection/ 
 
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. It is intended only for the recipient(s) named above. If you are not named above as a recipient, you must not read, copy, disclose, forward or otherwise use the information contained in this email. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender (whose contact details are above) immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies.

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


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