RE: [Enum] Subject: I-DACTION:draft-ranalli-peek-walter-enum-t1roles-00.txt

[Richard Shockey <[e-mail]>]

At 05:56 PM 11/27/2000 -0500, Judith Oppenheimer wrote:
>I do not see where this draft anticipates that the "service provider" for a
>toll free number may not be a TSP, but rather a so-called "RespOrg" (stands
>for Responsible Organization.)  For that matter, the calls may not resolve
>to the end user subscriber either.
>
>One or more TSPs (programmed to be used at varying times of day for
>cheapest rates, for example) can simply be used as a provisioning tool,
>sending calls to one or multiple locations, none of which are the
>controlling party of the toll free number.
>
>Judith

Hello Judith..

Let me try and clear up a few things here. You are right that many of the 
drafts discussed here do not adequately or address the specific 
requirements and functions of the Toll Free System but I can assure you 
that those needs are are understood and being met.

The "controlling party" of the Toll Free number is just as important .. as 
any telephone number.

If there is a problem it is one of semantics and understanding the new 
service logic of Internet Telephony.

Assume the case of 1 800 DOG-BONES that wishes to provision ENUM services 
to accept calls using SIP.

That number has been delegated to that "subscriber" under the normal terms 
and conditions of 800 service ..so the "controlling party" is known to the 
800 SMS and can be verified.  The key to ENUM authority is that this 
verification can be successfully accomplished and that proper authorization 
can be delegated from the T1 to the T2 entity that actually holds the 
Resource Records that provision real service.

Once this is accomplished we can assume that 1 800 DOG-BONES resolves to a 
SIP URL either under the direct control of the "controlling party", to use 
your terms, or to a T2 ENUM service provider that maintains these records 
under contract for this service under various SLA's etc.

The SIP proxy that ENUM resolves to will maintain the real service logic of 
call routing necessary to complete the call based on the numbers 
"controlling party" requirements.[ time of day etc]  And the syntax of that 
service logic is defined by the IPTEL WG as Call Progress Language.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-iptel-cpl-04.txt

The CPL is the real provisioning tool for Call Progress and routing as you 
outline. And the promise of this whole exercise in standards development is 
that  service logic now resides within the complete control of the 1 800 
number holder ..and not the carrier from whom service was delivered.

ENUM is very simple in its abstraction. Number In ..URL Out. Its the URL 
that really controls the call and what that URL is. It is the URL that must 
be controlled by the number holder.

Is this a touch clearer?


> >
> > At 05:18 PM 11/27/2000 -0500, you wrote:
> > >Is this system meant to accomodate U.S. toll free numbers?
> > >
> > >Judith
> >
> > Any national ENUM system has to accommodate toll free
> > numbers. 800 - 877
> > etc, numbers in the US are E.164 numbers. Its just that the
> > authority for
> > authorization ( record holder ) is different.
> >
> >




 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Richard Shockey
Senior Technical Industry Liaison
NeuStar Inc.
1120 Vermont Avenue N.W.
Suite 550
Washington DC. 20005
Voice 202.533.2811
Fax to EMail 815.333.1237 (Preferred for Fax)
Cell : 314.503.0640
INTERNET Mail & IFAX : [e-mail]
or   [e-mail]
http://www.neustar.com

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<


_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
[e-mail]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum