Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM
"Richard Shockey" <richard@shockey.us> Thu, 05 March 2009 15:17 UTC
Return-Path: <richard@shockey.us>
X-Original-To: enum@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: enum@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E49523A6809 for <enum@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 07:17:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.53
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.53 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.735, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q9H9RXrXvUkb for <enum@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 07:17:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from outbound-mail-148.bluehost.com (outbound-mail-148.bluehost.com [67.222.38.38]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 784733A6899 for <enum@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 07:17:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 4374 invoked by uid 0); 5 Mar 2009 15:15:19 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box462.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.62) by outboundproxy5.bluehost.com with SMTP; 5 Mar 2009 15:15:19 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=shockey.us; h=Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Content-language:Thread-Index:X-Identified-User; b=oSP/sIa0/SixW+xF38c09SeMuL9CYDZHcvUz3+uYA9yz1VHDgbpbHh5icbf5FZ9ObcZ5hQL04NvMVFNXmh9I1ZIUUV/IzQuN84Y25HTmrkGk+Xmv41kDoZY5tWHwV+Kh;
Received: from pool-173-66-69-164.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([173.66.69.164] helo=rshockeyPC) by box462.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <richard@shockey.us>) id 1LfFKq-00007k-Ba; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:18:08 -0700
From: Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>
To: 'Lawrence Conroy' <lconroy@insensate.co.uk>, 'Bernie Hoeneisen' <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch>
References: <C5D459CC.270A%d.malas@cablelabs.com> <046f01c99d29$5f228e90$1d67abb0$@us> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0903050947050.30758@softronics.hoeneisen.ch> <95CBE4B6-A8B4-4348-A545-F02F658A4D9E@insensate.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <95CBE4B6-A8B4-4348-A545-F02F658A4D9E@insensate.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 10:18:03 -0500
Message-ID: <012301c99da5$958ab530$c0a01f90$@us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Content-language: en-us
Thread-Index: AcmdeVdqaWCC33t8TaKYHrkXaOO4BAAK9Y3g
X-Identified-User: {3286:box462.bluehost.com:shockeyu:shockey.us} {sentby:smtp auth 173.66.69.164 authed with richard+shockey.us}
Cc: 'IETF ENUM list' <enum@ietf.org>, 'Daryl Malas' <d.malas@cablelabs.com>, 'Tom Creighton' <Tom_Creighton@cable.comcast.com>
Subject: Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM
X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Enum Discussion List <enum.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum>, <mailto:enum-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/enum>
List-Post: <mailto:enum@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:enum-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum>, <mailto:enum-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:17:54 -0000
As Don said the purpose of this draft is to describe a method for trunkgroup that does not require a new Enumservice type.... a BGP essentially. Which is why I have no objection to a fast track. However should someone want to have a E2U+SIP:TRUNK then yes the new registration method could create that...if and when we can get the document approved by the IESG this century. > -----Original Message----- > From: Lawrence Conroy [mailto:lconroy@insensate.co.uk] > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 5:01 AM > To: Bernie Hoeneisen > Cc: Richard Shockey; IETF ENUM list; 'Daryl Malas'; 'Tom Creighton' > Subject: Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM > > Hi Bernie, folks, > Agreed. > If there is a crucial reason to force this through the IETF on the old > track, then let's discuss this at the ENUM WG meeting :). > all the best, > Lawrence > > > On 5 Mar 2009, at 08:47, Bernie Hoeneisen wrote: > > > Hi Rich > > > > Why don't we use the new process as decribed in > > > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-enum-enumservices-guide > > > > for Trunk Group? So, the document does not need to be WG item. > > I believe it is not worth doing anything according to the old > > process at > > this point in time. > > > > cheers, > > Bernie > > > > > > On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Richard Shockey wrote: > > > >> To the list .. > >> > >> FYI this draft essentially supersedes the previous draft that Tom > >> Creighton > >> and I co authored earlier. > >> > >> As far as I'm personally concerned this is still a legitimate WG > >> item as it > >> describes, in another way , work we had already approved. It does > >> have > >> significant applicability in the market today. > >> > >> I have no issues with this proceeding as a ENUM WG document unless > >> there are > >> objections. We are close to closure but fast tracking this to WGLC > >> could be > >> of help to operators looking at this type of function. > >> > >> Comments? Any objections to a fast track? > >> > >> From: enum-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:enum-bounces@ietf.org] On > >> Behalf Of > >> Daryl Malas > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 6:16 PM > >> To: enum@ietf.org > >> Cc: Tom Creighton > >> Subject: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM > >> > >> All, > >> We have submitted a new draft describing another method for > >> incorporating > >> trunk group information in an ENUM response. > >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > >> directories. > >> Title : Trunk Group Use in ENUM > >> Author(s) : D. Malas, T. Creighton > >> Filename : draft-malas-enum-trunk-sip-00.txt > >> Pages : 7 > >> Date : 2009-03-04 > >> This document concludes that incorporating trunk group parameters > >> into an Electronic Number (ENUM) response for the Session > Initiation > >> Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] service URI is a more effective approach > >> compared to defining a new ENUM service type for a 'trunk'. Upon > >> further review of the existing ENUM trunk group draft > >> [I-D.ietf-enum-trunkgroup] and practical operator experience, this > >> draft recommends the use of the current trunk group contexts as > >> defined in [RFC4904] as additional parameters in the E2U+SIP > >> enumservice NAPTR record [RFC3403] URI. > >> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-malas-enum-trunk-sip- > 00.txt > >> Regards, > >> Daryl > >> ----------------- > >> Daryl Malas > >> CableLabs > >> (o) +1 303 661 3302 > >> (f) +1 303 661 9199 > >> mailto:d.malas@cablelabs.com > > _______________________________________________ > > enum mailing list > > enum@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum
- [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM Daryl Malas
- Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM Richard Shockey
- Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM Bernie Hoeneisen
- Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM Lawrence Conroy
- Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM Don Troshynski
- Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM Richard Shockey
- Re: [Enum] New Draft: Trunk Group Use in ENUM Daryl Malas