Interesting People mailing list archives
more on ITU or ICANN - a case story from Denmark
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:25:04 -0500
------ Forwarded Message From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker () bbiw net> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:17:15 -0800 To: <dave () farber net>, Ip <ip () v2 listbox com> Subject: Re: [IP] ITU or ICANN - a case story from Denmark Dave, It sounds as if the current ENUM administration is working exactly as intended... and exactly as needed. I suspect the real problem is that the innovators feel the need to be too bureaucratic, themselves. Here's why...
From: Frode Greisen <frode () greisen net>
....
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:17:38 +0100 There is an agreement between the ITU and the IESG that the RIPE NCC runs the top level domain but requests to operate county domains must go to ITU-T which forwards the request to the country telecom regulator for decision.
Telephone number administration is a well-established global infrastructure service. ENUM is specified as a direct extension to it. This means that assignment of numbers that are the official DNS instantiation of the PSTN E.164 number MUST be fully coordinated with the existing E.164 assignment agencies. And this means that anyone seeking to administer a national ENUM registry MUST incur the overhead and approval of the E164 national regulatory agency bureaucracy. For what it's worth, I suspect some of these national agencies would be open to having "experimental" administration using special procedures, during initial operation of an official E.164 ENUM national registry. But, of course, this depends upon the laws and policies governing operation of the individual national registries. Concern about coordination with PSTN national registries received considerable discussion and debate during the ENUM development. The potential for serious problems is real. However, none of this prevents parallel innovation... On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:20:09 -0500, David Farber wrote:
From: Kevin Murphy <kmurphy () datamonitor com>
...
There have been a number of proposals to do commercial ENUM in a top-level domain, by launching a domain such as .tel, with ICANN's consent.
The problem, here, is thinking that a top-level domain is necessary. The right-hand portion of the domain name merely needs to be a constant. ANY initial domain name will suffice, as long as there is agreement to use it. It is probably correct to worry that a .tel standard string will create confusion with the PSTN-coordated administration. We humans are so easily confused. Hence it is probably BETTER to have a string that is a tad awkward, from the standpoint of human reading. That way people will know that it is an independent effort. So go agree to use some third-level string. ANY third-level string. I would be happy to assign e164.mipassoc.org to a consortium of administrators. Lots of other DNS administrators for existing sub-domains would be equally happy to provide a path, I'm sure. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking +1.408.246.8253 dcrocker a t ... WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net ------ End of Forwarded Message ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on ITU or ICANN - a case story from Denmark David Farber (Jan 12)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- more on ITU or ICANN - a case story from Denmark David Farber (Jan 12)
- more on ITU or ICANN - a case story from Denmark David Farber (Jan 15)