AW: AW: [enum-wg] Kapsch CarrierCom first company to be reached with ENUM (questionable)

Hi Christoph,
   You say 3762, I say 3764. I'll leave the religious wars to someone 
else.

However -  Congratulations!
You have managed to find an Enumservice syntax for your NAPTRs that
I haven't seen before:  E2U+h323:voice

Looking at the code, I suspect that this will successfully break 
Asterisk's
enum.c processing.

all the best,
   Lawrence



On 8 Oct 2004, at 11:10, Christoph Künkel wrote:
> Lawrence,
>
> add just any extension to the trunk base number, e.g. 
> 0.9.0.0.3.7.1.3.0.7.9.4.e164.arpa.  See the NAPTR.
>
> However, I think you missed my point(s).  I was not going to debate 
> wether I have a NAPTR or not.  I was just trying to make the point 
> that the original thread implied a tight coupling between ENUM and 
> SIP, where there is none.  And that Kapsch certainly is not the first 
> company to be reached with ENUM.
>
> :-) Christoph
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Conroy, Lawrence (SMTP) [mailto:lwc at roke.co.uk]
>> Do I miss something or is this thread falsely mixing up only loosely
>> coupled issues?
>>
>
> Yes, you do miss something.
>