This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/cooperation-wg@ripe.net/
[cooperation-wg] Re: [enum-wg] market potential/future for public ENUM
- Previous message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Re: [enum-wg] market potential/future for public ENUM
- Next message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Re: [enum-wg] market potential/future for public ENUM
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Patrik Fältström
paf at cisco.com
Thu Jun 2 10:07:30 CEST 2011
On 1 jun 2011, at 19.14, Richard Shockey wrote: > Well as your former ENUM WG chair (yea!! NO BLUE DOT!!!) .. Yes public ENUM is essentially dead. That just because the holders of E.164 does not allow end users that use the E.164 in question have the ENUM record in DNS refer to whatever they want. Only regulation can unlock this situation. That forces E.164 holders to either have a DNS that people can enter whatever they want, or let third parties run DNS for the E.164 numbers in question. This has nothing directly to do with ENUM, but rather whether the E.164 number should be tied to one and only one specific provider of services or not. I also copy cooperation wg in RIPE as that wg is one that could discuss this lock-in situation that exists. Patrik
- Previous message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Re: [enum-wg] market potential/future for public ENUM
- Next message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Re: [enum-wg] market potential/future for public ENUM
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]