Re: I-D Action: New draft - draft-bellis-enum-send-n-00
"Richard Shockey" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.enum |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <122101c8966b$f7e360c0$e7aa2240$@us> |
In line... > > We still need a *workable* solution to the overlap dialing issue. > (People don't consider timers to be adequate.) > > This seems like the only real solution to that. > > > 2. If such a standardization effort should be undertaken, should the > IETF do > > it? Since we're trying to close down ENUM, this would be done > somewhere > > else I believe. > > If we want it available via a protocol (and I think that is far > preferable to a word doc), and if it is to at least play nice with > enum, > then ietf seems like a suitable place. But I am not really familiar > with> the alternatives. I'm told Geneva is very pleasant in the springtime. I highly recommend Le boufe rouge restaurant. Excellent French bistro food. > > Re the numbering authorities: Obviously they must have a role in this. > But it is not nice if we have to wait for a national numbering > authority > to report that some number that was assigned to a hotel in germany now > may end in either "0" or "[1-9]xxx". The reporting needs to be more > direct from those who implement the behavior. Numbering is, has been and will continue to be a nation state issue. My own sentiment is that this is a out of band data point that it will be very difficult implement as a protocol. For in country calls ..its a network element configuration issue. For out of country calls ..give the call to your termination partner and let them sort it out (a trunking decision). > > Paul >