Subject: RE: [Enum] Validation of Carriers

From: "Pfautz, Penn L, NEO" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 11:22:10 -0400

Richard;
I agree that the validation problem is less an issue for carrier ENUM.
In the USA, for example, on can simply task the
Registry to verify carrier of record based on the Local Exchange Routing
Guide and Number Portability Administration databases and you're done.
And our fine legal system will ensure that any carrier that tries to
game the system will be hung out to dry...

Penn

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Stastny Richard
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 11:17 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Enum] Validation of Carriers

Hi all,

The basic question here is validation of carriers

I am not sure if this is a problem at all in Carrier ENUM

In User ENUM validation this is an issue to keep ENUM delegations
in sync with the existing assignment of E.164 on the PSTN.

It is common practice in all ENUM trials that the optimal validation 
method is the one where the carrier hosting the number is validating 
the user request. All other methods are considered clumsy workarounds
if the carrier is not co-operating.

Nobody has ever raised the issue how the carrier is validated in the
first place.

Q1. Why should a carrier not be trusted in Carrier ENUM in the first
place also?

Q2. What is the incentive why a carrier should enter wrong data on
purpose? and 

Q3. What is the threat if a carrier enters data wrongly
erroneously?

Ad Q2 may only happen if there are termination charges and a carrier
may hijack calls to charge higher termination charges than he has to
pay to finally deliver the call (arbitrage). National regulation
may not allow this and provide sanctions.

Ad Q3: This may happen, but will immediately be detected by the carrier
itself if he receives the first call to this number and not serving it,
or it may be detected by the registry if the real serving carrier wants
to enter his data.

IMHO these problems can be solved easily by a code of practice

Richard

_______________________________________________
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: Alexander Mayrhofer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 17:32:46 +0200

> game the system will be hung out to dry...

i agree:

I think that registries could be fine with regular "sanity-check" level 
validation based on comparing the ENUM database with other sources - 
probably even only for a randomly chosen sample of the numbers.

Then, Any carrier that tries to break the rules of the game might risk being 
banned of the game... (or, probably, the checked samples will include all 
his numbers before that happens)

Alex