Re: Send-n, rat holes and real issues
"Rosbotham, Paul" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.enum |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CF70278861C76843835D4160627745D204CD51@GBCWSWIEM001.ad.plc.cwintra.com> |
> > - In the context of user-ENUM where population is > inevitably partial, then Send-N would reflect what's in > there...e.g. if +448001111 wasn't populated, then no Send-N > records would reflect its existence. That's the point that > Jay's been trying to get across...in a user-ENUM context the > number lengths as specified by the numbering plan > administrator are of limited value...e.g. if there was a > range in the UK that was 15 digits long, coding that into > Send-N in ENUM is pretty pointless unless any such numbers > were actually populated in ENUM. > > That is the most pointless thing I have ever heard of. > > I think we're all agreed this information would be good if it > were to be > made available in a useful form, now you're saying the > information will > only be partially available if there is a NAPTR record, but if one or > more NAPTR records exist for a end user record then there is > no need for > send-n, what the ???? > No, the other way around. Let's say that +448001111 *is* populated with it's NAPTRs. In that case, a query to 0.0.8.4.4.e164.foo would return a send-N with (assuming absolute) N = 9. If, however, +448001111 was not populated, that would mean that all of the numbers actually in ENUM behind +44800 would be of either 11 or 12 digits long. In that case, a query to 0.0.8.4.4.e164.foo would return a send-N with (assuming absolute) N = 11. ...the point is the Send-N records are populated according to what NAPTRs *are* populated, not according to those which could theoretically be populated. In the latter example, it's saying "don't bother querying me until you've got at least 11 digits because there's nothing in ENUM with anything less". It's *not* saying "according to the numbering plan administrator, all numbers in this range are at least 11 digits long". Subtle difference. This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by the Cable & Wireless e-mail security system - powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive managed e-mail security service, visit http://www.cw.com/uk/emailprotection/ The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. It is intended only for the recipient(s) named above. If you are not named above as a recipient, you must not read, copy, disclose, forward or otherwise use the information contained in this email. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender (whose contact details are above) immediately by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies. Cable and Wireless plc Registered in England and Wales.Company Number 238525 Registered office: 3rd Floor, 26 Red Lion Square, London WC1R 4HQ