[enum-wg] The ENUM Federation: activities, website etc.

A fine and useful distinction and a excellent question. I often have to
describe this to outsiders and the regulators. First its not really Voice
over IP as much Voice USING IP. For better or worse the carriers are using
all sorts of techniques to maintain what they believe is a mandate for QoS
internally as well as across AS boundaries.

What the ENUM discussion and frankly the entire VoIP discussion complicates
is what is telephony and the desire of the ITU-T to, frankly, remain
relevant.  Its is an issue. It does complicate the general WCIT discussion
over peering routing policies.

It doesn't help when these crazy ETNO people go out whining like Ed Whitacre
of ATT did here in the US about "Its our pipes" and crying like little
children to Brussles "But Google makes too much money Mommy we want some."
Sender pays God help us.   Its pretty pathetic from this side of the pond.
Of course the regulatory environment in Europe is different but the major
North American carriers have essentially said .. "whatever". They have
started to figure out you can make reasonable money by just moving bits. 

The current experience in carrier managed VoIP is that the peering and
routing agreements for SIP real time traffic are entirely different from the
classic IP traffic transit/peering agreements. Even the Layer 1
interconnection is different. The GSM carriers essentially say the same
thing with IPX but it hasn't deployed much yet.  This layer of discussion
tends to play into the hands of the ITU types who do argue that telephony IS
their sand box and since telephony is moving to IP they need to have some
role in Internet Governance.    

-----Original Message-----
From: enum-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:enum-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf
Of Carsten Schiefner
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 3:02 AM
To: Richard Shockey; 'John C Klensin'
Cc: 'RIPE ENUM WG'
Subject: Re: [enum-wg] The ENUM Federation: activities, website etc.

Richard, John -

but isn't this - "telephony" using IP - and/or a transition to it happening
right now, at this very moment anyways?

Regardless if there is a certain ENUM flavour being used for it or not?

So what I am asking is whether ENUM really makes the difference in
"encouraging assumptions or debates about why ITU should have control over
peering and routing policies and perhaps even authorization of carriers and
services", as John has stated.

Best,

	Carsten

On 28.08.2012 16:37, Richard Shockey wrote:
> [RS> ] John .. I totally agree but the odd thing is that 6116 as a 
> carrier numbering database technology is working and working pretty 
> well.  The new driver is the end of TDM and SS7 signaling. The Class X 
> gear in the network is literally starting to crumble.  The PSTN, at 
> least in North America, is clearly evolving into the Public SIP 
> Network. You are absolutely correct that this is starting to 
> complicate the WCIT discussion. If "telephony" is using IP then ITU-T
thinks its theirs.