Re: [Enum] requesting reviewers for draft-ietf-enum-xmpp..

>Perhaps e2u+pstn:sip, e2u+pstn:sips etc would have made more sense?
>e2u+pstn:sip is exists, well the sip part does, or maybe e2u+voip:sip
>would have made more sense.

I faintlycan  remember voice:sip and voice:h323, what's left is voice:tel

this was two years ago

I have given up this discussion ;-)

Richard

________________________________

Von: Duane [mailto:duane@e164.org]
Gesendet: Mi 29.11.2006 22:35
An: Alexander Mayrhofer
Cc: enum@ietf.org; Otmar Lendl
Betreff: Re: [Enum] requesting reviewers for draft-ietf-enum-xmpp..

Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:

> I haven't yet found out which of the two the "holy grail" is - we also try
> to work on this issue in draft-ietf-enumservices-guide. contributions are
> very welcome for that document...

As far as I can see, virtually all current enumservices use subtype
except h323, sip and pres, everything else has subtypes.

Richard pointed out to me privately, that the only time it makes sense
not to use a subtype is when there is duplication, eg sip:sip, but there
is no subtype for sips, just the possibility of a different URI type.

Perhaps e2u+pstn:sip, e2u+pstn:sips etc would have made more sense?
e2u+pstn:sip is exists, well the sip part does, or maybe e2u+voip:sip
would have made more sense.

--

Best regards,
 Duane

http://www.cacert.org - Free Security Certificates
http://www.nodedb.com - Think globally, network locally
http://www.sydneywireless.com - Telecommunications Freedom
http://e164.org - Because e164.arpa is a tax on VoIP

"In the long run the pessimist may be proved right,
    but the optimist has a better time on the trip."

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

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