Re: Email Portability Approved by Knesset Committee

[Steven Bellovin <smb () cs columbia edu>]

On Feb 23, 2010, at 1:06 AM, gordon b slater wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 21:20 -0800, Dave CROCKER wrote:
> > In general, a core problem with the Knesset law is that it presumes
> > something 
> > that is viable for the phone infrastructure is equally - or at least
> > tolerably - 
> > viable in the email infrastructure.  Unfortunately, the details of the
> > two are 
> > massively different in terms of architecture, service model, cost
> > structures and 
> > operational skills.
>
> Good point Dave; for the mobile phone industry, number portability is an
> endpoint thing - no harder to change than a field in a
> billing/accounting database (the SIM#, keeping it very simple here), for
> email its a WHOLE lot more. 

And who runs this database?

Local number portability requires a new database, one that didn't exist before,  It's run by a neutral party and maps 
any phone number to a carrier and endpoint identifier.  (In the US, that database is currently run by Neustar -- see 
http://www.neustar.biz/solutions/solutions-for/number-administration)

Figuring out how such a solution would work with email is left as an exercise for the reader.

                --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb