Subject: RE: [Enum] Declaring an "Implementation"

From: "Anne Brown" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:14:54 -0400

>>   My particular objection to use of NAPTR is its requirement to 
>>specify service-specifics (e.g., services available and email 
>>addresses, etc.) at such a high level, when it understood that DNS 
>>is often not appropriate for maintaining information on a per 
>>resource basis (see draft-ietf-urn-dns-rds-01) and such information 
>>is not scaleable and manageable on a global or even a national level.

>The draft you point at talks about the URN resolution process which 
>is a very specific one, and I don't want to go into extrapolating 
>that discussion into what we deal with here. And, as one of the 
>people which came up with the current design of URNs, it is NOT 
>because I am trying to run away.

Do you think that storing service-specific and resource-based information
(e.g., service-specific addresses for each individual telephone number) at a
global or national level will be scalable and manageable?

>>Is it your intention to mandate NAPTR as "the" ENUM RR to be used, 
>>and not allow others?

>My personal, yes, when I define the algorithm we talk about in the 
>ENUM group is to get back URI(s). 

OK, I agree with this.  However, as noted above I have reservations about
how it should be used.

Anne Brown
Nortel Networks
[email-masked]
+1 613 765 5274