Re: Send-n, rat holes and real issues
"Brian Rosen" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.enum |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
As I said, I don't much care exactly how we get number length, as long as it's the full length in some reasonably complete form. The general problem of distributing the data is hard, because regulators, carriers and even enterprises are the authoritative source, and getting all of them to cooperate and be trustworthy to each other is hard. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Duane > Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 6:35 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Enum] Send-n, rat holes and real issues > > Jay Daley wrote: > > > Exactly!! Which is why we need send-n. > > Just because you need a solution to a problem doesn't mean it must > replicate what PSTN systems already do that's just crazy. > > Has no one actually got a valid criticism for my suggestion of doing > this as a routing type protocol rather than this hack job on ENUM? > > Seems most ignored my suggestion completely except for one remark about > TRIP. > > -- > > Best regards, > Duane > _______________________________________________ > enum mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum