<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <TITLE>Nachricht</TITLE> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY> <DIV>Question to the friends in Poland - does "Access to the production system" mean read access or write access or both ?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My question was related to my assumption and initial understanding, that all access was restricted to polish TSPs, like in a Carrier-E**M System my understanding is that ALL ACCESS is limited to participating Carriers. I would definitely question compliance to EU regulation if ALL ACCESS (incl. READ access) was limited to polish TSPs.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>To the further reaching question raised by Richard: no comment</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lothar</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV></DIV> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=de dir=ltr align=left>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Stastny Richard [mailto:Richard.Stastny@oefeg.at] Gesendet: Montag, 13. Dezember 2004 10:00 An: Reith, Lothar [HAHN:NGD:EXCH]; Andrzej Bartosiewicz; Carsten Schiefner Cc: enum-wg@ripe.net Betreff: RE: [enum-wg] COCOM & ENUM ... </DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left>Good question.</DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left>BTW: I ask myself the same question regarding the recent regulations in Germany that only providers in located in Germany</DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left>may get numbers ;-)</DIV> <DIV dir=ltr align=left>-richard</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=de dir=ltr align=left> <HR tabIndex=-1> From: Lothar Reith [mailto:lothar.reith@nortelnetworks.com] Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 9:55 AM To: Stastny Richard; 'Andrzej Bartosiewicz'; 'Carsten Schiefner' Cc: 'enum-wg@ripe.net' Subject: AW: [enum-wg] COCOM & ENUM ... </DIV> <DIV></DIV> A problem may be in the formulation: "Every TSP in Poland". Is that in compliance with EU regulations for fair cross-border competition ? Lothar -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: enum-wg-admin@ripe.net [<A href="mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net">mailto:enum-wg-admin@ripe.net</A>] Gesendet: Samstag, 11. Dezember 2004 18:28 An: Andrzej Bartosiewicz; Carsten Schiefner Cc: enum-wg@ripe.net Betreff: Re: [enum-wg] COCOM & ENUM ... >BTW: Access to the production system is restricted to the TSPs with >officially assigned numering blocks by "Office of Telecommunications >and Post Regulation" in Poland. There is only one "minor" problem with the implementation in Poland: It is Carrier E**M in e164.arpa -richard ________________________________ Von: enum-wg-admin@ripe.net im Auftrag von Andrzej Bartosiewicz Gesendet: Sa 11.12.2004 16:55 An: Carsten Schiefner Cc: enum-wg@ripe.net Betreff: Re: [enum-wg] COCOM & ENUM ... Carsten, The answer is: Yes. We have switched over to production 6 months ago. You missed my presentation in Sophia Antipolis... :) Every TSP in Poland with assigned numbering block may sign the contract with NASK and start the registration of ENUM domain names in 8.4.e164.arpa (5 EURO/year). BTW: Access to the production system is restricted to the TSPs with officially assigned numering blocks by "Office of Telecommunications and Post Regulation" in Poland. We also have the "testing" system, so everybody (not only TSPs) can test the full functionality. The only difference is that we do not export domain names to zone file from the "testing" system. Andrzej. On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Carsten Schiefner wrote: > Hi Andrzej, > > thanks for the link - on p. 4 it reads: "Production registry launch: > May 19, 2004". > > Did I completely miss a according announcement on all of my ENUM > related lists (and there are some! ;-) or did NASK switch over to > production in absolute silence? > > Best, > > -C. > > </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>