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

--------- Original Message --------
From: Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com>

> >>>>> "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.

The point I was trying to make is that the arguments given in the Syrian
document are less about ENUM as about the entire ediface.

I think it is important to keep clean air on this. ENUM is not about
changing what ITU and national number authorities for E.164 do. ENUM is
ancillary to this.



>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.
>

indeed. But this issue is far broader than a protocol called ENUM.

>     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.

ok but my point is that this is no different for a national enum delegation
.sy or any domain. The delegation tree is shorter for a .com zone (normally)
but you still come up with the same basic issues of internet structures that
Mr. Kisrawi mentions. These are very old and wel known and debated issues
that he raises.

If he is referring to e164.arpa then that is one thing if he is referring to
.arpa itself then that is quite another (I think!)


snip
>
>     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? :-)

OK how does an ENUM delegation (as currently defined) provide authority to
create a number plan, delegate that number plan to operators to create
further numbers within their number blocks?

This is what I mean by authority and delegation. I don't mean a protocol
that some script kiddie uses to create his own hack telphone service. I am
talking about the official line of authority.

ENUM maps E.164 into DNS but only once E.164 numbers are allocated (through
the ITU process) and only then into the official ENUM tree through a
procedure that involves the ITU E.164 delegation tree.

As we know from uk group the process is far from perfect and there is plenty
of room for improving clarity and as you quite rightly point out moving from
interim status.

>
> 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.

we need to get away from them and us,

>
>     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.
>

my point exactly. It is not about ENUM per se.

Christian


________________________________________________
Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.2