Re: ENUM trials in general, axel Pawlik <axel.pawlik@localhost, Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg@localhost

[Michael Haberler <]

Carsten,

I do not understand the outcome of this consultation with the IAB.

There is a trial. There are fragmented directories underneath the country 
code spaces. Running some directory associated with a domain is a standard 
practice. There is a need for an interim directory - even I would like to 
try interoperability outside my +43 backyard without plowing through 
assorted websites. It is useful to exercise the collation of a larger 
directory, or take a stab at building a distributed directory in the first 
place. Everybody registering at this stage clearly knows that he cant claim 
innocence (mostly not even incompetence :-) on the privacy implications of 
the current state of technology. Everywhere the regulators are at least in 
the loop, or driving the trials. I for my part (interim 3.4.e164.arpa 
registry) cannot observe any lack of visibility and attention by our 
regulator, telcos, data protection paranoia usual suspects etc.

I would like the person shooting down such a useful idea to come a 
concrete, workable and timely alternative.

Can I suggest you RIPE guys give this issue a second try in explaining the 
issue to the IAB ?

thanks,

-Michael

ps: I dont fully grasp the rationale for the involvement of the IAB in such 
a IMV tactical development support question in the first place. Define it 
as trial support and go ahead.

This might also be the opportunity to show SRV records at work with a 
useful job.


At 15:32 20.02.2003 +0100, Carsten Schiefner wrote:

> Richard, Marco -
>
> Richard Shockey wrote:
> >At 09:24 AM 1/12/2003 +0000, Marco Bernardi wrote:
> >> I think running such a directory  implies some responsibilities. We
> >> don't want any misuse/abuse.  All this must be done in responsible
> >> way and by a responsible organization. It seems to me that  it can be
> >> the perfect job for Ripe (Carsten -  sorry for putting  you on the
> >> spot...)
> >
> > I have to agree RIPE would be perfect as the administrator of the root
> > .... but I also think this is very very simple and not too much real
> > work
> >
> > the only data collected would be
> >
> > User Name
> > email address
> > e164 number
> >
> > that can periodically generate a text file test participants can use
>
> After considering the issue with IAB - the RIPE NCC is operating the Tier0 
> registry on behalf of the IAB - we came to the conclusion that the RIPE 
> NCC shall refrain from offering such an even only temporary ENUM directory 
> service to the community, as such a service would be better carried out by 
> a different entity to preserve a clear understanding of responsibilities 
> in the Internet community.
> Also the effects of such a temporary directory relating to the longer term 
> issue of ENUM directories and associated privacy and regulatory issues are 
> not fully explored yet and need more consideration.
>
> Thanks for your understanding - best,
>
>         -C.