Subject: RE: [Enum] FW: Last Call or New Draft? - Portability

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 09:15:55 +0300

Hi Mike & Patrik,

> > My proposal would be to write a specific I-D about how to 
> > handle each one of these cases.

That is being planned:

"Roaming Support with DNS"
"ENUM Resolution to Support Signaling Transport"

> I would prefer that we create new Service types instead of new 
> protocols. I.e. is the Goo Service actually returning the resource
> or is it returning some Goo service specific bit of information? If
> its just returning the resource then I2R is appropriate but I dobut
> that's what we're doign here.

For the first draft, I think I2R should be sufficient. 

The second draft is a bit more complicatated.  Essentially, in the
SIGTRAN protocols will be carrying some Application Protocol (AP) over
an user adaptation layer (UA) + SCTP (though it could even be an 
adaptation layer + TCP).  E.164 numbers will used by the AP to
identify the signaling endpoint.  Ideally, I'd like to perform
an ENUM guery and see what UAs the E.164 identified endpoint 
supports (I'll need the URI as well, most likely host name or IP 
address + port number).

> I.e. create (and hopefully publish) the Goo service and create new
> Service parameters such as I2GR (Identifier to Goo Resource) or
> E2GM (E164 Number to Goo Metadata). I.e. once you're in the Goo
> system you get (and should) define new Services to appropriately
> refleect what actual functions you're after...
> 
> Also, after thinking about this some. I do think that the Service
> you're using in ENUM should be something new. I2R (N2R was deprecated)
> means "URI to Resource". ENUM is doing "E164 Number to URI" so it
> should be something new tag here (E2I?)

I think E2I might be sufficient for both.  So, who gets to define
the E2I tag?

John

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

---

From: Michael Mealling <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 07:51:12 -0400

> supports (I'll need the URI as well, most likely host name or IP 

I'd have to look at this more but it sounds like its transport
discovery. I.e. I have a URI but I don't know if its over tcp,udp, sctp or
what (sorry, I have to translate into my terms to understand this 
telephony stuff ;-). Hence it would be more "E164 to URI Plus 
Some Other Stuff". I'll let you figure out what Service tag that
might be. ;-)

> I think E2I might be sufficient for both.  So, who gets to define

You get to do it in the ENUM draft. If we start getting alot
of 'em we'll setup an IANA registration process so they're all listed
in one place...

-MM

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions	|          www.lp.org          |  [email-masked]