Subject: [Enum] better way to do johnston-enum-conf-service

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 12:32:38 -0500

I read this and I may be missing the point on it but it seemed sort of like
a bad idea. The conference phone number should have registrations with the
services such as sip and web - defining new servers will make things worse.
It will hamper interoperability and the existing mechanism will work better.

Imagine a UA that supports ENUM where I type in a phone number to call. If
it supports enum today, it will do a lookup, find the sip service and no
what to do. Now if it finds the conference service with a sip uri and sip
service - what does it do? which one would it choose? will we need another
service for IVRs? What about voicemail? What benefit would it have to know
that it is a conference - the signaling will tell it that as soon as it
contacts it in some signaling protocols. Now image a conference that only
published the conf service in ENUM but the UA did not support this, it would
not work. What about if the sip service pointed to one place and the conf
service pointed to another. All sounds like a very confusing state of
affairs with little to nothing to be gained.

I think I am basically saying that the the currently defined services in RFC
4002 and 3762 fully solve the problem that this draft is trying to address.

Cullen

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
enum at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum