ENUM issues

Français | Español

Print Version

Home : Office of the Secretary-General : CSD

ENUM issues

ANNEX 7: ENUM ISSUES

Introduction

The ITU ENUM Workshop on 17 January 2001 in Geneva consisted of informational presentations and interactive panel discussions. This document captures some of the issues discussed, and comments made, during the second half of the one-day meeting. It is provided as informational for participants and interested parties. This document has no formal status.

Important Notes

- Terminology: Some terms may have more than one interpretation, depending for example on different perspectives (such as operational or commercial), contexts (such as technical or regulatory), or usage (such as generic or specific). Accordingly, this is an illustrative document and not a formal reference document.

- Issue Status: The issues listed in this document were discussed during the limited time available at the workshop. There was no opportunity for the participants to review output documents on the day of the workshop. No agreements, consensus, decisions, or resolution of issues are intended or implied. This material is being made available for the information of participants and other interested parties.

- Clarifications: The scope of listed issues tended towards ENUM administrative issues with operational, deployment, technical, or related aspects. Notes to listed issues are explanatory and are not intended to be definitive. The order of listed issues is arbitrary and does not convey any classifications or priorities. The list is incomplete and clearly not exhaustive, neither is it authoritative since it is indicative of discussion points only.

- National matters: Issues generally are considered to have aspects that are national matters. Some issues may have international aspects as well.

- Other text: Additional text intended to help document some of the issue items as discussed was offered, and was supplied shortly after the workshop, by several participants. Shorter portions are incorporated in the list.

Issues List

ISSUE 1: An agreed process needs to be developed, e.g., between appropriate authorities.

- Notes: "ITU & IETF position states: ITU has responsibility to provide assignment information. Geographic Country Codes will only be included in the DNS when authorised by the Member State responsible for that code." (from slide text based on the Berlin Liaison Statement, now RFC 3026)

The slide considered information about Geographic Country Codes (for "Countries"). The information is whether or not a Member State has authorized its Country Code to be included in DNS for ENUM. The process needing development is for provision of that information.

ISSUE 2: The status of .arpa matters (including e164.arpa matters) is ??

- Note: Some text describing status is contained in Annex 8.

ISSUE 3: The following "issues" text was discussed. The text came from a slide from one of the workshop presentations.

· Maintaining integrity of E.164

· Building ENUM integrity

· Not all countries have the same regulation or rules of
administration BUT all need to address the same issues
for ENUM

· How should Tier 1 Registries be selected?

- it’s a national matter

but there are options…….

- Notes: "ITU & IETF position states: Each administration is responsible for ensuring DNS administrators (Registries) are aware of appropriate changes" (from slide text on the Berlin LS, now RFC 3026)

The slide considered the responsibility to ensure that DNS administrators (for Registries) are aware of (or are provided with information about) appropriate changes. Those changes pertain to numbering resources within Geographic Country Codes. Presumably, "administration" refers to national administration of national numbering resources, and so responsibility here is a national matter. There was a very wide range of comments. The item listed here notes that there was such a discussion.

ISSUE 4: These are also items about inserting numbers into Registries (for ENUM) for numbers that are within a Country Code for a Country (or an integrated numbering plan), as national matters:

· How to determine the most appropriate arrangement?

· Who runs national Registries?

· An agreed process needs to be developed between participating Member States.

- Note: These were discussed in response to a presentation slide.

ISSUE 5: These are items about inserting numbers into DNS for numbering resources that are within a Country Code shared by Networks:

· Assignees of Network Codes need to be formally made aware of their obligations with respect to ENUM.

· Some ITU-T Recommendations related to E.164 Network Codes may require review/amendment/revision.

- Notes: "Networks" and "Network Codes" are used here in the sense of ITU-T Rec. E.164 and related Recommendations. Assignment of a Network Code is the assignment of an E.164 "CC+IC" resource, where CC is a Country Code shared by Networks, and where IC is an Identification Code (within that CC) assigned to a Network. The assignment of a CC+IC carries with it the responsibility for numbering resource administration for those numbering resources within the CC+IC.

ISSUE 6: These are items about inserting numbers into DNS for numbering resources that are within a Country Code shared by Groups of Countries (noting that this is work in progress in ITU-T SG2):

· Assignees of E.164 resources for Groups of Countries need to be formally made aware of their obligations with respect to ENUM.

· Some ITU-T Recommendations related to E.164 resources for Groups of Countries may require review/amendment/revision.

- Notes: "Groups of Countries" is used here in the sense of Draft New ITU-T Rec. E.164.3, the status of which is "requiring further development" within SG2. Assignment of such an E.164 resource is the assignment of an E.164 "CC+GIC" resource, where CC is a Country Code shared by Groups of Countries, and where GIC is an Identification Code (within that CC) assigned to a Group of Countries. The assignment of a CC+GIC carries with it the responsibility for numbering resource administration for those numbering resources within the CC+GIC.

ISSUE 7: For E.164 resources behind a CC+IC (for Networks) or a CC+GIC (for Groups of Countries), resource assignees are responsible for providing E.164 assignment information to DNS Administrators (for ENUM).

- Notes: See Issue 5 and Issue 6. Responsibility for the provision of information is an assignee's obligation with respect to ENUM.

ISSUE 8: This item was discussed when Number Portability (NP) was considered with respect to ENUM:

· In some cases with Number Portability, the name server must point to a Service Registrar on an individual E.164 number basis, not a number block.

- Notes: A comment was made concerning "maintaining the 'right' of a user to benefit from NP". A comment was made concerning "the impact of NP on a user's ability to authenticate 'ownership' of a (ported) number". There was also discussion about the use of terms such as "rights" or "ownership".

ISSUE 9: This item was discussed when aspects of Service Providers were considered with respect to ENUM:

· Some countries are moving to single number administration and payment for numbers, does this raise additional issues?