[enum-wg] ITU: debate over User-ENUM administration

>>>>> "Christian" == Christian de Larrinaga <cdel at firsthand.net> writes:

    Christian> I don't see a contract between ITU and US as resolving
    Christian> the issues raised as it remains debatable that IETF and
    Christian> IAB are US entities.

It's more than debatable. The IAB and IETF don't exist because they
have no legal personality. This gives governments and organisations
like the ITU a bit of a problem. They are used to contracts and
treaties: legally binding documents between recognised entities. So
since there's no contract that says ITU have administrative control
over e164.arpa, that makes some ITU members very anxious. The liaison
statements and MoUs between ITU and RIPE NCC and IAB give effective
administrative control. However these are not the watertight contracts
-- which jurisdiction(s)? -- that some people in SG2 want.

    Christian> I'm curious that Mr. Kisrawi appears not to have any
    Christian> operational concerns for management of 3.6.9.e164.arpa
    Christian> as things stand but of political control over .arpa and
    Christian> the root.

Syria's country code has not been delegated, so there are no
operational concerns. And for all we know, the Syrians might have
decided not to get it delegated until there's sufficient ITU control
over e164.arpa -- for some definition of control. They could have
decided that it's not in their national interest to get the delegation
until the administrative safeguards they seem to want are in place.
That's a perfectly reasonable position. Some countries are content
with the current arrangements -- if they weren't, they would not have
allowed the delegation of their country code -- others aren't. This is
one reason why the ENUM discussions inside SG2 are continuing.

    Christian> ITU has agreed a procedure with the IAB and RIPE over
    Christian> ENUM. It seems a bit late for ITU to start questioning
    Christian> the legal ownership of .arpa now and totally out of
    Christian> context to do so citing ENUM which represents a tiny
    Christian> amount of Internet traffic and is only one protocol to
    Christian> extend reachability for E.164 numbers.

Christian, that's beside the point quite frankly. If ITU SG2 wants to
discuss ownership of .arpa or the planet Tharg, they are free to do
so. Please note too that the current process for handling delegation
requests by ITU is governed by interim procedures. They're temporary.
A permanent solution is pretty much guaranteed to require clarification
of the administrative control over e164.arpa and .arpa. ie SG2 members
need to be sure that if ITU comes to an understanding over e164.arpa,
IAB won't choose a different domain name or pick a new Tier-0 registry
or someone takes .arpa away from IAB. And this understanding should be
formalised in some sort of contract. Mr. Kaswari's contribution is the
next step down that road.

    Christian> So maybe this group could make some representation into
    Christian> the ITU debate on ENUM to focus on what ENUM is and
    Christian> what it is not in particular in regard to regulatory
    Christian> issues (e.g., ENUM has nothing to do with assignment of
    Christian> E.164 numbers or national number plans) might be
    Christian> helpful to steer ENUM out of these waters. Is this
    Christian> something RIPE could do?

So "ENUM has nothing to do with assignment of E.164 numbers or
national number plans", does it? What drugs are you on and where can I
get some? :-)

There is a need to explain to SG2 how things like the DNS work and how
the internet is governed. [I did some of that when I attended SG2.]
RIPE NCC could do this if they were willing and able to commit the
time and resources. However they're not Sector Members of ITU, so they
can't participate in SG2 meetings. I think the same would be true for
most other internet people that could take on this educational role. I
believe ITU can invite external experts to attend SG2 as observers,
though SG2 would probably be more comfortable having that dialogue
between Sector Members rather than with an outsider.

    Christian> Having said this these top level arguments are not
    Christian> going away and so the IAB as others in the Internet
    Christian> world need to establish its rights over .arpa and
    Christian> assert them but this is not an ENUM issue.

Indeed. And it's not a topic for this list.