Re: [Enum] 5 years since last message

Bernie Hoeneisen <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch> Tue, 02 July 2019 08:18 UTC

Return-Path: <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch>
X-Original-To: enum@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: enum@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 444C21200B3 for <enum@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 01:18:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DkckzpXI-VDo for <enum@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 01:18:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from softronics.hoeneisen.ch (softronics.hoeneisen.ch [62.2.86.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3E20120024 for <enum@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 01:18:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by softronics.hoeneisen.ch with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch>) id 1hiDzC-0007Xe-5x; Tue, 02 Jul 2019 10:17:58 +0200
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2019 10:17:58 +0200
From: Bernie Hoeneisen <bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch>
X-X-Sender: bhoeneis@softronics.hoeneisen.ch
To: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
cc: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com>, Olivier Guillard / AFNIC <Olivier.Guillard@nic.fr>, Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap@NLnetLabs.nl>, IETF ENUM list <enum@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <2249F1CB-D46E-40DE-88DC-4817D667A447@frobbit.se>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1907020944350.19816@softronics.hoeneisen.ch>
References: <201901141410.x0EEAegF082526@bela.nlnetlabs.nl> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1901141529160.28417@softronics.hoeneisen.ch> <201901151217.x0FCHoCj066558@bela.nlnetlabs.nl> <20190627134744.GA18924@civette.prive.nic.fr> <B85F0E22-A837-43A4-A8B7-B271223F88DD@cable.comcast.com> <2249F1CB-D46E-40DE-88DC-4817D667A447@frobbit.se>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; BOUNDARY="37663318-1742487168-1562055478=:19816"
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: bernie@ietf.hoeneisen.ch
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on softronics.hoeneisen.ch); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/enum/Ytj3piuis_ru0F-YhQsUX0VDVko>
Subject: Re: [Enum] 5 years since last message
X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Enum Discussion List <enum.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/enum>, <mailto:enum-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 02 Jul 2019 08:18:09 -0000

I can confirm Patrik: ENUM standard is in use, somewhat, with variatians.
(We occasionally even get consultancy work assigned on ENUM deployments.)

What I normally see in the wild, I would certainly not call "Public User 
ENUM" (what we designed ENUM / RFC 6116 for). Most of the deployments are 
"Private Infrastructure ENUM", some are "Private User ENUM". I have not 
encountered any "Public User ENUM" nor "Public Intrastructure ENUM" for 
some time.

["Public" meaning the root is owned and/or governed by a public / official 
/ "higly-recognized" body, e.g. governmental, ICANN, ... ; "User" meaning 
Enduser has control over the content of the zone belonging to his own 
number (as oposed to "Infrastructure" where zone is controlled by a 
provider).]

I wonder whether my observations match with what others see in the wild.


The mailing list needs to remain open. There is a mention in RFC 6117 
of this list as the central place to discuss new Enumservices.


Have a nice summer and c.u. (or at least some of u) in Montreal!

cheers,
  Bernie (another former ENUM co-chair)

--

http://ucom.ch/
Modern Telephony Solutions and Tech Consulting for Internet Technology




On Tue, 2 Jul 2019, Patrik Fältström wrote:

> Well, the standard is in use -- sort of -- with various modifications 
> locally (like use of a different prefix than what is assigned here in 
> IETF). I heard last time last week people "just saying" this is what is 
> and should be used for routing of communication with E.164 numbers as 
> destination in time of emergency/stress where centralized IN systems can 
> not be reached (but locally cached DNS can).
>
> So the list is silent, but there is some kind of usage. Does this "some 
> kind of usage" imply something should be done?
>
> I do not know.
>
> I personally did conclude after the first couple of years of discussions that NAPTR is incredibly stupid. Designing things to have so large RRSets is not very optimal, so other DNS types would be better. I suggested the simple URI. But it itself got stuck in the IETF process of creation of new RRTypes, and when it finally was approved, the interest in deployment was sort of gone :-(
>
> And people seems to have implemented NAPTR...
>
>   Patrik
>
> On 2 Jul 2019, at 2:41, Livingood, Jason wrote:
>
>> So what needs to happen here? Seems indisputable that there's not much happening on the ENUM front...
>>
>> On 6/27/19, 9:48 AM, "enum on behalf of Olivier Guillard / AFNIC" <enum-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of Olivier.Guillard@nic.fr> wrote:
>>
>>     pong :-)
>>
>>     le Tuesday 15 January à 13 H 17 , Jaap Akkerhuis a écrit :
>>    >  Bernie Hoeneisen writes:
>>    >
>>    > > Hi Jaap
>>    > >
>>    > > Well, there is a dependency on this list in RFC 6117...
>>    > >
>>    > > On the other hand, registering new ENUM services has not been that popular
>>    > > either for several years...
>>    > >
>>    > > cheers
>>    > >   Bernie (Designated Expert of the IESG and other list maintainer)
>>    >
>>    > In that case, it would make sense that you take over the maintaining
>>    > of this list as well. Would you? If so, let's arrange that off-list.
>>    >
>>    > 	jaap
>>    >
>>    > _______________________________________________
>>    > enum mailing list
>>    > enum@ietf.org
>>    > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum
>>
>>     --
>>     Olivier
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     enum mailing list
>>     enum@ietf.org
>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> enum mailing list
>> enum@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum
>