Subject: [Enum] Now that carrier enum is seperate, will user enum ever be deployed?

From: Michael Mealling <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 08:28:01 -0400

Apologies for missing the discussion but after reading
draft-haberler-carrier-enum I'm curious whether the discussion got to
whether or not this would cause user enum to never be deployed in any
useful level? It would seem that by seperating the two the pressure is
off of the carriers to implement the rest of the tree? 

-MM

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

---

From: Michael Haberler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:55:51 +0200

At 14:28 11.08.2005, Michael Mealling wrote:

>useful level?

at least we do not intend to do that for +43 - both are useful and serve 
different purposes

I would conjecture other folks share that thinking (speak up!)

>It would seem that by seperating the two the pressure is

Unfortunately I fail to detect any significant "pressure on carriers to 
implement User ENUM" in the first place, which is part of the problem - my 
perception is anything from remote interest to blissful ignorance

What I do see is demand for "Carrier" ENUM which will help to get e164.arpa 
delegations in place, registries going, and thus serve both purposes. I 
would assume if a country or NPA decides to get going, eventually both 
trees will be available.

-Michael

---

From: lconroy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:05:15 +0100

Hi Michael,
   good to see your posting.
Another (converse) view is that:
-  an "enlightened" originating provider might want to try both to
    see if they can find an IP termination to save on termination  
charges.
-  some providers rather like getting termination charges, and are not
    enthusiastic about publishing SIP URLs so that other providers can
    avoid paying (or seeing ENUM . If the end user/registrant publishes
    a reachable SIP URL, then their terminating provider may not need
    to be enthusiastic/aware/involved/...
    From the end user/registrant perspective, it could be like having a
    LoCall/Free phone number (if there are enough "enlightened"  
providers.

That's the <large financial amount> question.

Given that a certain carrier spent over 10 years noticing that some
competitor-originated calls were (allegedly) taking "non-optimal"
routes across the US, you might think that every carrier would jump
at the chance of saving call costs, but I couldn't possibly comment.

all the best,
   Lawrence