Re: [Enum] RE: ENUM Working Group Last call on InfrastructureENUM Requirements

[Andrew Newton <andy at hxr.us>]

Tony Rutkowski wrote:
> Apologies for the U.S.-centric reference.  Part 52 of
> the FCC's regulations establish the basis for exclusive
> authority, administrative mechanisms, and substantive
> requirements for the use of E.164 numbers in the U.S.
> http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_05/47cfr52_05.html
>
> The remark was intended to raise the challenge of devising
> any "Infrastructure ENUM Requirements" in an IETF document,
> including definitions, when the actual authority to articulate
> just about everything in the document resides with national
> regulatory authorities.  Typically, to produce what is contained
> in the document, must be undertaken through a public rule
> making or consultative process.  Few, if any, have done so.

Really!?  Can the FCC dictate how E.164 numbers are used in vCard?  Can 
the FCC dictate how E.164 numbers are used on web sites?  Can the FCC 
dictate how E.164 numbers are written on napkins and post-it notes?

Somehow I doubt their power is that far reaching.  But if it is, I 
propose we let the rest of the world get on with the business of 
developing an infrastructure ENUM protocol while the U.S. govt wallows 
in its own bureaucratic pig sty.

-andy


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