Subject: RE: [Enum] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-enum-operation-02.txt

From: "Pfautz, Penn L, NNAD" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:06:08 -0500

Bob:
While I see your point re *logical tiers*, I'm concerned about shifting
terminology now that lots of discussion has taken place using Tier 1 as the
Registry and Tier 2 as the Service Registrar in various forums. I'm not
worried about .arpa - since it has essentially no ENUM specific info, only a
pointer to where e164.arpa lives, we don't need to treat it as a Tier.

Penn

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert H. Walter [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 11:50 AM
To: Pfautz, Penn L, NNAD; [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Enum] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-enum-operation-02.txt

> 1. We need to synch up the use of  terminology associated with Tiers
across
> the several I-Ds. It seems that Tier 1 in the Operations document refers
to
> Tier 1 as including both what is Tier 1 in the draft-pfautz-yu-enum-adm-00
> and the RIPE NCC (which the next draft of pfautz-yu will refer to as Tier
> 0). While together these two Tiers collectively do what operations
document
> says - direct you to the service registrar - it may useful to keep them
> separate. In any case we need to get to consensus about language.

Hi Penn,

By introducting Tier 0 we risk confusing the logical tiers of ENUM with
the physical tiers or zones of DNS.  If you describe Tier 0 as "e164.arpa."
operated by NCC RIPE, do you then define Tier -1 as "arpa." operated by
NSI?  Who, What, How and When the 200+ country code zones will be
administered and operatated has yet to be defined.  I recommend we stick
to the logical ENUM tiers when describing ENUM reference models and steer
clear of the DNS physical tiers or zones.

Richard, the I-D draft-ranalli-peek-walter-enum-t1roles-01.txt was
published some weeks ago... Would you publish a link to the list?

Thanks,

Bob

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

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

---

From: "Robert H. Walter" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 15:47:09 -0500

> pointer to where e164.arpa lives, we don't need to treat it as a Tier.

Penn,

Thanks for responding, though I'm not sure I understand your position.
I agree that ENUM consists of both the Registry (Tier 1) and the Service
Registrar (Tier 2), but see no shift in terminology.  I'm trying to
make a point that the Tier 1 Registry is an abstraction of the physical
implementation and includes all of the DNS zones that delegate to, but
do not include the Tier 2 Service Registrar (zones that contain NAPTR
resource records).

The Tier 2 Service Registrar DNS may be generally defined as one or more
DNS zones that contain NAPTR resource records with fully specified E.164
names that conform to the naming structure defined in RFC 2916.

The Tier 1 Registry DNS may be generally defined as one or more DNS zones
that contain NS and A resource records that eventually delegate a fully
specified E.164 name to a name server(s) operated by a Tier 2 Service
Registrar.

Regards,

Bob