Re: Send-n, rat holes and real issues

Please note that my proposal works in every circumstance.  Each
authoritative source of number length data provides the data for the part of
the tree it is authoritative for.  This could be a carrier, but it could
even be an enterprise.

It makes a small database.  "Small" is in the current notion of databases.
The kind of database where many of them fit in the disk drive of a US$250
computer.  I can't imagine why any new system could possibly be concerned
about keeping a cache of such a database.  Since ENUM and this RR is new,
we're talking about new systems.

Brian



> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Otmar Lendl
> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 5:55 AM
> To: Duane
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Enum] Send-n, rat holes and real issues
> 
> On 2008/07/08 02:07, Duane <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Otmar Lendl wrote:
> >
> > > Who announces a length for a prefix? The carrier (or enterprise) who
> > > operates the prefix. Given any leeway from the NRA, he is the only
> > > one who definitly knows.
> > >
> > > Any porting operation leads to someone to announce the length of the
> > > number/prefix he just ported in. With open numbering plans, this
> ported
> > > number does not need to have the same length as before.
> > >
> > > Thus, taking open numbering plans into account, the size of the
> > > BGP-like *whatever* table is O(#blocks + #ported numbers).
> >
> > You are thinking about this wrong, the only time someone needs to
> > announce a prefix is if the length is different, countries with fixed
> > length dial plans would have very few entries.
> 
> If it were that easy everywhere and in all cases, we would not be
> talking about this.
> 
> > Take Australia for example, I downloaded the entire file of allocated
> > numbers from the regulator a while back and ran a script across it.
> 
> Doesn't surprise me. Now do the same trick for Austria and Germany.
> 
> In the .au case, your sole data-source is the NRA. If that would hold
> everwhere, then Brian's proposal could work: these numbering-plans
> could be easily aggregated into a single database. (Why the hell you
> want to do something BGP like for that, I just can't grasp.)
> 
> The trouble, and the reason for the send-n proposal, is the fact that
> the NRA of .uk does NOT know the number lengths for all numbers in its
> country-code. The same holds for .at, .de and probably a few more.
> 
> /ol
> --
> // Otmar Lendl <[email protected]>, T: +43 1 5056416 - 33, F: - 933
> // nic.at Internet Verwaltungs- und Betriebsgesellschaft m.b.H
> // http://www.nic.at/  LG Salzburg, FN 172568b, Sitz: Salzburg
> _______________________________________________
> enum mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum