enum-1----Page:2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
The problem we‘re addressing: ENUM under e164.arpa currently means ‚User ENUM‘ (by opt-in) only. A carrier-of-record has no standard place to deposit, for instance, Point of Interconnect (POI) information. VoIP peering BoF documented interest IP interconnect info through „zone cohabitation“ doesnt fly Interconnect resolution currently pressed towards private trees Consequences: Low per-tree resolution rates As announced by, and limited to „tree club members“ Alternative is multi-tree resolution – does not scale well, aliasing problems No predefined scheme for global interoperability (!) Private tree solutions tend to lack WRT to standards – reducing operator choice long-term Registry cost: Repeated OPEX per registry (assuming different operators) No synergy between Carrier and User ENUM operation this might imply failure of User ENUM – especially in small countries less pressure on regulators to get some form of ENUM going at all – slower footprint for User ENUM |