Subject: RE: [Enum] Relief Area Codes and REGEXP

From: "Pfautz, Penn L, ALVAP" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 12:15:26 -0400

Some may think it ugly but the US ENUM Forum is planning to handle permissive dialing during code relief by having two records for each number in the Tier 1 and, at Tier 2 either duplicate NAPTR records with old and new numbers or use of CNAME.

Penn Pfautz

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Reid [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 11:46 AM
To: Lawrence Conroy
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Enum] Relief Area Codes and REGEXP 

>>>>> "Lawrence" == Lawrence Conroy <[email-masked]> writes:

    Lawrence> Relief Area Codes may be introduced and, in this case,
    Lawrence> there will be some period during which both the "old"
    Lawrence> and the "new" numbers are valid. Both of these sets of
    Lawrence> numbers will be within the golden tree and so we need to
    Lawrence> map from an AUS holding the "old" number into an ENUM
    Lawrence> domain name.

    Lawrence> So...how do I convert an AUS (E164 number) into an ENUM
    Lawrence> domain name?

Won't DNAME -- RFC2672: Non-Terminal DNS Name Redirection -- solve
this problem? I can't recall if DNAME got shunted to Experimental
Status along with A6 records.
_______________________________________________
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: Lawrence Conroy <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 17:58:00 +0100

Jim originally wrote in answer to my query on Relief Area Code support::-

Then, at 12:15 pm -0400 30/9/02, Penn Pfautz wrote:
>Some may think it ugly but the US ENUM Forum is planning to handle 
>permissive dialing during code relief by having two records for each 
>number in the Tier 1 and, at Tier 2 either duplicate NAPTR records 
>with old and new numbers or use of CNAME.
>
>Penn Pfautz

to which I reply:

Hi Folks,
    ...whilst some may think that VERY ugly :). Yes, it CAN be done
by duplicate T1 entries pointing to common T2 entries, but that's
a lot of data population to be done (and maintained). It's also
a challenge if the ENUM registrant wants to change their T2 provider.

In answer to Jim's question, yes, DNAME should work fine, IMHO.

It avoids the issues with NAPTRs (like "how do you reverse an arbitrary
set of digits in a REGEXP"?) whilst allowing a single RR.

Question - does DNAME have an implication on use of DNSSEC?

all the best,
    Lawrence
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roke Manor Research    : This information is provided "as is" and is not
<mailto:[email-masked]>: intended to create any contractual or legal
<tel:+441794833666>    : relationship.