Subject: RE: [Enum] Carrier ENUM, SIP URIs and DNS

From: "James McEachern" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 15:37:50 -0400

Richard Stastny wrote:

>Still, the basic question for any type of ENUM is:
 
>Can you reach a sip: URI one gets from an mobile operator 
>e.g. sip:frank at vodafone.de from any enterprise owned 
>SIP server, from sipgate.de or from fwd.pulver.com
 
The ability, or inability, to reach a URI such as sip:frank at vodafone.de from
any enterprise owned SIP server would appear to have nothing to do with
converting E.164 numbers to URIs. The problem would be the same if you
started with the URI, or even if there was no E.164 number associated with
the URI at all, would it not? So isn't it really a SIP issue rather than an
ENUM issue?

What am I missing?

Jim

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

---

From: Adrian Georgescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 15:52:05 -0400

On Jun 26, 2005, at 3:37 PM, James McEachern wrote:

Richard Stastny wrote:

Still, the basic question for any type of ENUM is: Can you reach a  
sip: URI one gets from an mobile operator
e.g. sip:frank at vodafone.de from any enterprise owned
SIP server, from sipgate.de or from fwd.pulver.com

The ability, or inability, to reach a URI such as  
sip:frank at vodafone.de from
any enterprise owned SIP server would appear to have nothing to do  
with
converting E.164 numbers to URIs. The problem would be the same if you
started with the URI, or even if there was no E.164 number  
associated with
the URI at all, would it not? So isn't it really a SIP issue rather  
than an
ENUM issue?

What am I missing?
What you are missing is that if the target SIP URI is not reachable  
in the first place, you (as a carrier) would not need to use the  
e164.arpa tree to publish mappings of an E.164 number to that SIP URI  
either.

Adrian