Subject: RE: [Enum] Opt-in principle for calling users and communications providers

From: "Pfautz, Penn L, ALVAP" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 09:53:07 -0400

Mike:
The subscriber vs infrastructure issue gets rapped around the competition axle. We need to allow the subscriber to choose their Tier 2. But the TSP may not like the subscriber's choice of Dingbat's DNS and not want to rely on their service  for infrastructure needs.
In some of the early I-Ds we tried to work out how the TSP could have special records but in the e164.arpa tree at the the number assignee selected Tier 2. It *was* ugly and, since no one seemed anxious at the time to pursue the TSP record idea we dropped it.

Penn

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Mealling [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 8:55 AM
To: Stastny Richard
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Enum] Opt-in principle for calling users and
communications providers

On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 12:11:33PM +0200, Stastny Richard wrote:
> A. Mixing of infrastructure information requested by an operator and the
> information requested and controlled by the user in the Tier 2 choosen
> by the subsciber. (Mike: I do not think your assumption works, if the
> TSP, the ISP(s) and the Tier 2 Nameserver provider are differnt entities
> - see also James administrative nightmare comment)

But why does it matter that they're different entities? My ISP and I
are two different entities and we manage pretty well. It might have
a few hickups in the beginning but it'll work itself out...
 
> I understand, that IETF is currently not looking at the provisioning
> processes, but e.g. from the US ENUM forum documents one clearly can
> see, that it already complicated enough.

Its looking at provisioning from the standpoint of EPP which has ways
of handling some of this stuff. I really don't see a problem that the
IETF needs to deal with anyway: each combination of provider and end-user
is going to have slightly different policies about how they interact
with each other in that zone...

-MM

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | urn:pin:1
[email-masked]      |                              | http://www.neonym.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!! The Trailblazer spacecraft is going to the Moon! And for just $2500 a gram !!
!! you can send something along with it! Business cards, momentos, cremains,  !!|| anything! See http://www.transorbital.net for details!                     !!

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

---

From: Michael Mealling <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 10:08:25 -0400

On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 09:53:07AM -0400, Pfautz, Penn L, ALVAP wrote:
> Mike:
> The subscriber vs infrastructure issue gets rapped around the 
> competition axle. 

I figured that was part of the problem...

> We need to allow the subscriber to choose their Tier 2. 

Divorced from the number they have? I.e. I get a number from Verizon
but I get Sprint to handle my DNS? Or are we talking about TSP's who
are completely third party? I.e. neither the end-user or the number
asigner.

> But the TSP may not like the subscriber's choice of Dingbat's DNS 
> and not want to rely on their service  for infrastructure needs.

I was suggesting the opposite way: the TSP who assigned the number
chooses the DNS provider and the customer and that TSP cooperate
in provisioning the zone...

> In some of the early I-Ds we tried to work out how the TSP could have 
> special records but in the e164.arpa tree at the the number assignee 
> selected Tier 2. It *was* ugly and, since no one seemed anxious at the 
> time to pursue the TSP record idea we dropped it.

(I'm starting to fall all over the acronyms)...

The logical method from my point of view is I call up Bellsouth and say
I want a number and I want the co-provision option for that numbers DNS
entries. Bellsouth gives me a web page and an ID and I create DNS entries
for it. If Bellsouth is nice enough or if I buy the option they might even
give me the ability to handle the nameserver. Anyway, if I want some third
party service that needs to administer an particular NAPTR record in there
I give them a special userid and password for doing that...

I'm probably missing something important about telephony though. But that
would work for me....

-MM

---

From: Richard Shockey <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 11:29:44 -0400

>are completely third party? I.e. neither the end-user or the number

Verizon may issue my telephone number but the ENUM national T1 provider 
points to a BIND server in my basement or I could purchase a SIP service 
along with DNS/NAPTR management from SPRINT. Both are perfectly valid 
..what is essential is the incumbent is not in the provisioning path.

>in provisioning the zone...

I don't think so :-)  Can you spell "96 Act" ?

Apologies to our European friends. That is a "US thing".

>entries.

First you cant get a US NANP number without the provisioning of PSTN 
service from a certified carrier... however you may be able to purchase 
valid e.164 numbers in the future .. aka 878

>Bellsouth gives me a web page and an ID and I create DNS entries

That makes sense only if I am purchasing a valid service from Bell South 
that requires ENUM from howeverI can guarantee you that ATT and WCOM and 
SPRINT will not be too happy that the incumbent must be in the provisioning 
path for  a ENUM service such as SIP.

If I am buying a service, such as SIP, from ATT then I would logically 
expect ATT to offer such a fine web based interface such as you describe.

>I'm probably missing something important about telephony though. But that

You are not missing anything important about telephony you are missing 
something important about the politics and competive environment that US 
and even most European carriers have to live in.

Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technicial Initiatives
NeuStar Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza   Bldg 10    Sterling, VA  20166
Voice +1 571.434.5651 Cell : +1 314.503.0640,  Fax: +1 815.333.1237
<mailto:[email-masked]> or <mailto:[email-masked]>
<http://shockey.us > ; <http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<