Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM

[Don Troshynski <DTroshynski at acmepacket.com>]

I believe the point of the draft is that it defines the usage of Trunk Groups within SIP URIs without a unique service type.  Therefore no additional ENUM service is defined and the draft falls outside of the service registration process.  By comparing this method to a non-registered service type of e2u+trunk, it creates some confusion.  So, registration of the service type or removal of the reference might also be appropriate.

I think the draft is should be fast tracked as there is a need to document the use of trunk groups within ENUM.

One other more specific comment is that the document should define the treatment of the Trunk Group parameters within the ENUM client.  The options are:

a. Override the URI host and route based on embedded trunk group.
b. Route based on the URI host and forward the trunk group parameters downstream for further processing.
c. Define either behavior as acceptable or a matter of local policy.

Don

>-----Original Message-----
>From: enum-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:enum-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>Lawrence Conroy
>Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 5:01 AM
>To: Bernie Hoeneisen
>Cc: IETF ENUM list; 'Daryl Malas'; 'Tom Creighton'
>Subject: Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM
>
>Hi Bernie, folks,
>  Agreed.
>If there is a crucial reason to force this through the IETF on the old
>track, then let's discuss this at the ENUM WG meeting :).
>all the best,
>   Lawrence
>
>
>On 5 Mar 2009, at 08:47, Bernie Hoeneisen wrote:
>
>> Hi Rich
>>
>> Why don't we use the new process as decribed in
>>
>>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-enum-enumservices-guide
>>
>> for Trunk Group? So, the document does not need to be WG item.
>> I believe it is not worth doing anything according to the old
>> process at
>> this point in time.
>>
>> cheers,
>> Bernie
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Richard Shockey wrote:
>>
>>> To the list ..
>>>
>>> FYI this draft essentially supersedes the previous draft that Tom
>>> Creighton
>>> and I co authored earlier.
>>>
>>> As far as I'm personally concerned this is still a legitimate WG
>>> item as it
>>> describes, in another way , work we had already approved. It does
>>> have
>>> significant applicability in the market today.
>>>
>>> I have no issues with this proceeding as a ENUM WG document unless
>>> there are
>>> objections.  We are close to closure but fast tracking this to WGLC
>>> could be
>>> of help to operators looking at this type of function.
>>>
>>> Comments? Any objections to a fast track?
>>>
>>> From: enum-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:enum-bounces at ietf.org] On
>>> Behalf Of
>>> Daryl Malas
>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 6:16 PM
>>> To: enum at ietf.org
>>> Cc: Tom Creighton
>>> Subject: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM
>>>
>>> All,
>>> We have submitted a new draft describing another method for
>>> incorporating
>>> trunk group information in an ENUM response.
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>>> directories.
>>>     Title           : Trunk Group Use in ENUM
>>>     Author(s)       : D. Malas, T. Creighton
>>>     Filename        : draft-malas-enum-trunk-sip-00.txt
>>>     Pages           : 7
>>>     Date            : 2009-03-04
>>> This document concludes that incorporating trunk group parameters
>>> into an Electronic Number (ENUM) response for the Session Initiation
>>> Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] service URI is a more effective approach
>>> compared to defining a new ENUM service type for a 'trunk'.  Upon
>>> further review of the existing ENUM trunk group draft
>>> [I-D.ietf-enum-trunkgroup] and practical operator experience, this
>>> draft recommends the use of the current trunk group contexts as
>>> defined in [RFC4904] as additional parameters in the E2U+SIP
>>> enumservice NAPTR record [RFC3403] URI.
>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-malas-enum-trunk-sip-00.txt
>>> Regards,
>>> Daryl
>>> -----------------
>>> Daryl Malas
>>> CableLabs
>>> (o) +1 303 661 3302
>>> (f) +1 303 661 9199
>>> mailto:d.malas at cablelabs.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> enum mailing list
>> enum at ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum
>
>_______________________________________________
>enum mailing list
>enum at ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum