INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION UNION
	TELECOMMUNICATION STANDARDIZATION SECTOR STUDY PERIOD 2001 - 2004		COM 2-LS 40/2-E Date: May 2002 Original: English
SOURCE: *		ITU-T SG 2, 7-16 may 2002
TITLE:		enum lIAISON on iab instructions to ripe-ncc
Question(s):		Q1/2
LIAISON STATEMENT
TO:		ISOC for IAB
APPROVAL:
FOR:		Action
DEADLINE:

CONTACT:

Andrew Gallant

Tel: +1 301 762 4024 Fax: +1 301 762 5801 E-mail: abgallant@aol.com

Study Group 2 thanks ISOC (on behalf of IAB) for its reply, as given in TD WP 1/2 - 34.

Study Group 2 has reviewed the current instructions from the IAB to RIPE-NCC in terms of that reply, and notes the specific points and responses made by the IAB. Accordingly, SG2 requests that editorial changes and the suggested changes to Section 2, as summarized in the table below, be made.

In addition, SG2 suggests changes to Sections 1.4.1 and 2.6 to reflect the ITU TSB’s role in authenticating requests for delegation. Also, SG2 wishes to advise the IAB that a number of items mentioned in the original Liaison Statement from SG2, including the creation of a legal instrument, continue to be discussed actively within SG2; SG2 will be pleased to advise the IAB of progress made in due course.

For convenience, those sections of the instructions that have suggested changes are excerpted and are annexed to this document.

Study Group 2 looks forward to continued dialogue and ongoing cooperation with the IAB.

Table of Suggested Changes to IAB’s Instructions to RIPE-NCC

Section	Type	IAB Response	SG2 Request
1.4.2	Editorial change	(not mentioned)	Requested change
1.4.2	Bracketed text	“No changes ... by the IAB ...”	Noted
1.4.3	Suggested change	No problems, is included in 2.3	Noted
1.6	New clarification	(new)	Requested change
1.7	Suggested change	Not needed	Noted
1.8	Suggested change	Not needed	Noted
2.2	Suggested change	No problem	Requested change
2.6	Editorial changes	Agrees	Requested changes
2.6	New clarification	(new)	Requested change
2.7	Suggested change	No problem	Requested change
3.3	Editorial change	(not mentioned)	Requested change

_____________________

ATTACHMENT

The following are the changes requested by ITU-T Study Group 2 to the IAB’s instructions to RIPE-NCC concerning ENUM Administration. These changes are based on the instructions given at http://www.ripe.net/enum/instructions.html and are consistent with the IAB’s response to SG2 as given in TD WP 1/2 - 34. They also include two changes (to 1.4.1 and 2.6) to clarify the ITU TSB’s role in authenticating delegation requests.

(1.4.1) If ITU-T TSB explicitly authenticates a requests a delegation during the waiting period, the domain is delegated even though the 60 day period has not ended.

(1.4.2) If ITU-T TSB does not object, and does not inform the RIPE NCC of the objection during the waiting period, the domain is delegated according to the request.

(2.2) Given that different information will be requested by RIPE NCC (technical) and ITU-T TSB (administrative), iIt is recommended that the applicant send the request both to ITU-T TSB and the RIPE NCC.

(2.6) If a request comes in for a CC which is already delegated, the second request will be forwarded to ITU-T TSB. ITU-T TSB may authenticate an instruction from the E.164 resource assignee to instruct the the RIPE NCC to revoke the original delegation, to redelegate to another party, or to perform no action. Tthe RIPE NCC will take no action (other than forwarding the request to ITU-T TSB) until and unless such instructions are authenticated by received from ITU-T TSB. (This should minimize operational instability due to requests that might not be approved by ITU-T TSB.)

(2.7) Any changes referred to in (2.6) requested by the ITU-T TSB will be implemented by the RIPE NCC within 60 days of reception of the request by the RIPE NCC.

(3.3) Set up a mailing list with archiving and automcatic subscription capabilities where the RIPE NCC is to send announcements to. Anyone is to be able to subscribe to this mailing list, but posting is restricted.