IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Modern] Problem statement draft as working group document

Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us> Tue, 29 December 2015 23:29 UTC

Return-Path: <richard@shockey.us>
X-Original-To: modern@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: modern@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34D321A8ACC for <modern@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Dec 2015 15:29:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Dv9KRjA-k8cV for <modern@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Dec 2015 15:29:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from qproxy1-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (qproxy1-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [173.254.64.10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id DCE691A8ACB for <modern@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Dec 2015 15:29:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 14526 invoked by uid 0); 29 Dec 2015 23:29:45 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw3) (10.0.90.84) by qproxy1.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 29 Dec 2015 23:29:45 -0000
Received: from box462.bluehost.com ([74.220.219.62]) by cmgw3 with id zi9a1r00H1MNPNq01i9dZn; Tue, 29 Dec 2015 23:09:43 -0700
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=bej4Do/B c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=jTEj1adHphCQ5SwrTAOQMg==:117 a=jTEj1adHphCQ5SwrTAOQMg==:17 a=cNaOj0WVAAAA:8 a=f5113yIGAAAA:8 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=MKtGQD3n3ToA:10 a=1oJP67jkp3AA:10 a=ZZnuYtJkoWoA:10 a=8WrITzYgnNwA:10 a=YQA3agX6zLcA:10 a=wUQvQvOEmiQA:10 a=jqBRFv0mrdUA:10 a=FMnjzkzcAAAA:8 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=gxZvrgisAAAA:8 a=kKYZitD_28K1mjMe4VsA:9 a=N9tCvSuQj4uei8y3:21 a=XqU_Fe1vir23xX83:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=shockey.us; s=default; h=Content-transfer-encoding:Content-type:Mime-version:In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID:To:From:Subject:Date; bh=C1cUXQEG7FFIZMwsOYyPG8aB08cv0OqMhTPo76jyrDk=; b=QDqlu5COkRJv2TXZt4BtUDXluHLLvy7atm2FltiHqrqvSkKu4zMhaePxvJEq+NpnXjv03czaqAcrPieurlnY+tJU3zJW+wLSHfhfRahrNqFGR9rpUGDAzcXRTrQ/MZar;
Received: from [100.36.26.202] (port=58673 helo=[192.168.1.9]) by box462.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from <richard@shockey.us>) id 1aE3Oa-0006YK-HV; Tue, 29 Dec 2015 16:09:36 -0700
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.151217
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 18:09:29 -0500
From: Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>, Mark Delany <z2h@bravo.emu.st>, "modern@ietf.org" <modern@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <4BCC5D71-1D49-432D-B796-CC57E229C517@shockey.us>
Thread-Topic: [Modern] Problem statement draft as working group document
References: <DC43399C-E04B-40D0-9C07-B784002310E1@att.com> <D2988215.3313E%tom.mcgarry@neustar.biz> <E42CCDDA6722744CB241677169E8365615D5E722@MISOUT7MSGUSRDB.ITServices.sbc.com> <C6041BB9-7707-451F-9783-57375EDC5B7C@cooperw.in> <0F8F091A-7255-4781-81A3-48400BC670A1@att.com> <E7A0418C-8191-4DEF-A538-0428DD8F1DD9@brianrosen.net> <1BD85DAA-9DC4-459F-91E1-A9ACD51F7CEC@att.com> <20151218014249.41761.qmail@f5-external.bushwire.net> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8BADE25DCC@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8BADE25DCC@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
X-Identified-User: {3286:box462.bluehost.com:shockeyu:shockey.us} {sentby:smtp auth 100.36.26.202 authed with richard+shockey.us}
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/modern/9-SCxahVUaRL9WA3lTGWX03LOJ8>
Subject: Re: [Modern] Problem statement draft as working group document
X-BeenThere: modern@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Managing, Ordering, Distributing, Exposing, & Registering telephone Numbers non-WG discussion list" <modern.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/modern>, <mailto:modern-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/modern/>
List-Post: <mailto:modern@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:modern-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/modern>, <mailto:modern-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 23:29:48 -0000

Keith you are correct it does not .. Some of this might be useful some of it may not.  Certainly our experience with ENUM tells us to be cautious about playing around with matters under NRA authority. 

VOIP transition is already in place in multiple jurisdictions.  It is a matter of national policy in the US UK Canada etc.  The All IP transition is a matter of strategic concern to every supplier serving the industry. The carriers have made the decision. Its not just US Carriers this is DTAG as well.  You know this.

http://www.lightreading.com/nfv/nfv-strategies/dts-journey-to-a-new-ip-world/v/d-id/720033?

There is some concern about the underlying databases. Particularly those involving LNP.  I have no objection to offering tools to SP’s but target the application that makes sense. Interconnection metadata.  What do we do with carrier CERTS in STIR.  Something that is practial deployable. Not this numbering administration BS. 






On 12/18/15, 5:45 AM, "Modern on behalf of DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <modern-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

>I am not aware that VOIP transition is requires the MODERN work as a precondition.
>
>It is just a tool that some people think might be used (and that is potentially independent of VOIP usage).
>
>Regards
>
>Keith
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Modern [mailto:modern-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mark Delany
>Sent: 18 December 2015 01:43
>To: modern@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [Modern] Problem statement draft as working group document
>
>The Australian environment for one is likely to have growing interest given the forced migration of practically all PSTN to VOIP as a consequence of their National Broadband Network (NBN).
>
>I don't know of the NZ experience first-hand, but given they are making a similar transition many of the same issues will arise there.
>
>Maybe not today, but given the life-cycle of the IETF processes, it's entirely reasonable to think that WG product should keep these regional trends in mind.
>
>
>Mark.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Modern mailing list
>Modern@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/modern
>
>_______________________________________________
>Modern mailing list
>Modern@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/modern

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email