Re: Send-n, rat holes and real issues
Jay Daley <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.enum |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <OF4915200D.E3139D34-ON8025747B.006BF731-8025747B.006FAD5A@nominet.org.uk> |
Brian > > However it is still completely orthogonal to send-n. > Why? If you had the data I propose to get, it solves the send-n problem, > right? Why would we want two ways to get the same information? It only solves the send-n problem if: * every device that is going to do the ENUM lookup is pre-loaded with every data document for every country that might be dialled. * the tree being queried is sufficiently densely populated so that the number of times there is no number found (despite being in the number plan) is minimised. send-n on the other hand: * does not require any device to be loaded with any document * does not require the tree to be filled in any way Jay