Re: Send-n, rat holes and real issues

Brian

> No.
> 
> Send-n can't necessarily tell you that unless the ENUM tree is 
provisioned
> with each separate number.  Real systems don't necessarily do that. 
Many,
> including ours, lets you provision a range of numbers, and you won't be 
able
> to tell if the number is actually valid unless you try it.  That is what 
I
> meant.  The information on number length is not equivalent to working
> number, and never could be. 

Eh?  I have no idea what the first three sentences of that paragraph mean. 
 I'd be grateful if you could have another go at explaining that.

I understand your last sentence from your perspective - that a number with 
an identified SIP endpoint may still not be "working" but I don't get the 
logic of how it applies here - you are quite right that send-n can't deal 
with that but then neither can anything else!

Jay