Subject: [Enum] ..and I quote

From: Lawrence Conroy <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 20:12:04 +0100

Hi Rich, folks,
  Herewith a section from 2916bis (as is):
2.4.2.1 ENUM Services

    A service MUST be registered with the IANA via a description in an
    RFC.  ENUM Services specifications contain the functional
    specification (i.e.  what it can be used for), the valid protocols,
    and the URI schemes that may be returned.  For example, the Enum
    Service "presence" would define the various URI schemes ("im:",
    "mailto:") can be used and what the service can be used for ("Where
    is the owner of this E.164 number?").  Another example might be
    "sipvoice" which specifies that the URI must use the 'sip:' URI
    scheme and use the SIP protocol to make a voice call (as opposed to a
    voice mail call or fax call).

OK, if we need to add URI-scheme to the service field, we add it.
If we do this, then the sipvoice in the above extract might become
"sip-voice".

If people want to tag more than one enumservice, then this could
be sip+voice+somethingelse (assuming that the somethingelse RFC
included sip: as a valid protocol).

The above extract also shows a putative service (presence) that can
take more than one URI-scheme.

So why is it surprising that the strawman includes these higher
level services? They are a direct follow on from 2916bis. We add
in the URI-scheme so that the client doesn't need to apply the
regexp before finding out if it wants to use the regexp-ed result.
Et voila:: Quoting my previous post on URI-schemes:
At 3:38 pm +0100 26/5/02, Lawrence wrote:
>Thus, the syntax gets a little tricky here. I guess that something like:
>     <D3S-application-tag> - <URI-scheme> 1*( + <enumservice-tag>)
>is better - i.e. have the URI scheme immediately after the 'E2U'
>D3S application tag, and before any enumservice list.

all the best,
   Lawrence
-- 
[email-masked]: +44 1794 833666::<my opinions>:

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

---

From: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 20:02:49 +0200

> If we do this, then the sipvoice in the above extract might become

Please stop using the same characters in the enumservice as in the URI
scheme.

Call the schemes "foo" and "bar", and try to explain what they are about.

   paf

---

From: Lawrence Conroy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 21:39:48 +0100

>Call the schemes "foo" and "bar", and try to explain what they are about.
To which I reply:

Hi Patrik, folks,
   Yes - I do, always.

In the above, 'sip' is the URI-scheme, whilst 'voice' is (I assume) 
an enumservice.

If you prefer, this would be foo-bar. bar would be an enumservice 
that can use the
URI-scheme foo; this enumservice might, for example, result in an interactive
telephony communication using voice as its medium.

all the best,
   Lawrence

---

From: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 23:23:42 +0200

--On 2002-05-28 21.39 +0100 Lawrence Conroy <[email-masked]> wrote:

> In the above, 'sip' is the URI-scheme, whilst 'voice' is (I assume) an
> enumservice.
> 
> If you prefer, this would be foo-bar. bar would be an enumservice that
> can use the URI-scheme foo; this enumservice might, for example, result
> in an interactive telephony communication using voice as its medium.

What you have in the servicefield of the NAPTR record are enumservices. The
URI scheme is not there. The URI scheme is part of the URI which is the
result of applying the rewrite algorithm of the data part of the NAPTR.

If you want "foo" to mean that "the result of a rewrite is a URI with the
scheme SIP" then say so, and not that "sip" is what should go in the NAPTR
as a enumservice.

   paf

---

From: "abel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 11:45:51 +0800

Is it possible for the NAPTR RR

TEL    TTL    IN    NAPTR    ORDER PRE    SERVICE    "!RE!URI!"
REPLACEMENT

we can add TIME field in somewhere .
If I would like between 0900-1800+0800    some one can call me
                                      start   end    time zone
but NAPTR no such filed for using.

---

From: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 08:46:11 +0200

> but NAPTR no such filed for using.

No.

NAPTR have fixed format, defined outside of the ENUM wg.

If you want this, it have to be stored in some other system, like a SIP
server using some CPL based system.

  paf