Re: [stir] Renaming E164Number

Ooops.  I put the (2..MAX) in the wrong spot.

Also, I think that the TNEntry for spa should not be a list since TNAuthorizationList can contain as many spa entries as desired.

My revised suggestion is:

TNAuthorizationList ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (1..MAX) OF TNEntry

TNEntry ::= CHOICE {
  spc   [0] ServiceProviderCode,
  range [1] TelephoneNumberRange,
  one       TelephoneNumber }

ServiceProviderCode ::= IA5String

TelephoneNumberRange ::= SEQUENCE {
  start TelephoneNumber,
  count INTEGER (2..MAX)  }

TelephoneNumber ::= IA5String (SIZE (1..15)) (FROM ("0123456789#*”))

Russ

> On Apr 14, 2017, at 1:30 PM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> 
> Suggestion…
> 
> OLD w/ the addition of SIZE to TelephoneNumberRange:
> 
>     TNAuthorizationList ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (1..MAX) OF TNEntry
> 
>     TNEntry ::= CHOICE {
>       spc   [0] ServiceProviderCodeList,
>       range [1] TelephoneNumberRange,
>       one       E164Number }
> 
>     ServiceProviderCodeList ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (1..3) OF IA5String
> 
>     TelephoneNumberRange ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (2..MAX) {
>       start E164Number,
>       count INTEGER  }
> 
>     E164Number ::= IA5String (SIZE (1..15)) (FROM ("0123456789#*”))
> 
> NEW:
> 
>     TNAuthorizationList ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (1..MAX) OF TNEntry
> 
>     TNEntry ::= CHOICE {
>       spc   [0] ServiceProviderCodeList,
>       range [1] TelephoneNumberRange,
>       one       TelephoneNumber }
> 
>     ServiceProviderCodeList ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (1..3) OF IA5String
> 
>     TelephoneNumberRange ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (2..MAX) {
>       start TelephoneNumber,
>       count INTEGER  }
> 
>     TelephoneNumber ::= IA5String (SIZE (1..15)) (FROM ("0123456789#*”))
> 
> If this is acceptable, then I ask the authors to make the changes and post an updated I-D.
> 
> Russ
> 
> 
>> On Apr 14, 2017, at 12:14 PM, Peterson, Jon <jon.peterson@neustar.biz> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> No mutual understanding of the semantics is required by the authentication
>> and verification services here - though in practice, calls that are routed
>> to destinations via a dial string with a * or # in it should end up going
>> to fairly specialized pieces of equipment, and I'm actually less worried
>> about canonicalization and so on being an issue for special dial strings
>> like this than I am for ordinary E.164 numbers. We're not placing any
>> restrictions on where in the dial string those non-numeric characters
>> might appear, as there doesn't seem to be anything gained by doing so
>> except introducing complexity.
>> 
>> In terms of what to call it, if we can't agree on Freddie, I do think TN
>> or something similarly generic is appropriate. If we already have a group
>> field for TelphoneNumberRange, why wouldn't the base element be
>> TelephoneNumber? Or if we'd be overloading some existing registered name
>> by using that, like TelNum or something?
>> 
>> Jon Peterson
>> Neustar, Inc.
>> 
>> On 4/14/17, 10:56 AM, "Michael Hammer" <michael.hammer@yaanatech.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Jon,
>>> 
>>> Can the * and # be used arbitrarily anywhere in the string?
>>> 
>>> Is there some semantic to those characters that needs
>>> to be understood by both the sender and receiver?
>>> 
>>> Or does it not matter because the recipient only treats it as an opaque
>>> string?
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> Michael Hammer
>>> michael.hammer@yaanatech.com
>>> +1 408 202 9291
>>> 
>>> © 2016 Yaana Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Email
>>> confidentiality notice. This message is private and confidential. If you
>>> have received this message in error, please notify us and remove it from
>>> your system.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: stir [mailto:stir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peterson, Jon
>>> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 11:19 AM
>>> To: Chris Wendt <chris-ietf@chriswendt.net>
>>> Cc: IETF STIR Mail List <stir@ietf.org>; Russ Housley
>>> <housley@vigilsec.com>; Martin C Dolly <md3135@att.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [stir] Renaming E164Number
>>> 
>>> Agreed. We are allowing these non-numeric characters in certs to support
>>> a corner case that might arise in the future. Let's not agonize over what
>>> to call the field.
>>> 
>>> Jon Peterson
>>> Neustar, Inc.
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 13, 2017, at 11:11 AM, Chris Wendt <chris-ietf@chriswendt.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Can we just call it telephoneNumber?  I think we are mostly arguing
>>>> name here, right?
>>>> 
>>>>> On Apr 13, 2017, at 9:47 AM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Martin:
>>>>> 
>>>>> E.164 only allows digits.  What should we call a number that include
>>>>> digits and * and #?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Russ
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Apr 12, 2017, at 7:13 PM, DOLLY, MARTIN C <md3135@att.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sean,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> DTMF has no end to end meaning for routing, but is meaningful between
>>>>>> the UE and the SP processing those symbols.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Therefore, I do not see this as an issue.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: stir [mailto:stir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Sean Turner
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 7:04 PM
>>>>>> To: stir@ietf.org
>>>>>> Subject: [stir] Renaming E164Number
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In another thread I remember seeing a suggestion to rename E164Number
>>>>>> to DTMFNumber.  I created an issue:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_stirwg_
>>>>>> certificates_issues_4&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=G9v8uCSSQhCmp
>>>>>> w7ItG0r2g&m=UhVA_2O-z5DN-Bdom_WhPcD_-4nWww1SYGSyTVjFPBA&s=DXAZMIa2681lT
>>>>>> 5v97AAp36rnY1CfZpJifa2PbpimkwQ&e=
>>>>>> and here's the PR showing the resulting change:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_stirwg_
>>>>>> certificates_pull_5&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=G9v8uCSSQhCmpw7
>>>>>> ItG0r2g&m=UhVA_2O-z5DN-Bdom_WhPcD_-4nWww1SYGSyTVjFPBA&s=72Ta2iS7yNcl-FC
>>>>>> R5HdvXB5njEfC12k0kLz7QgCp87g&e=
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What do people think?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> spt
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> stir mailing list
>>>>>> stir@ietf.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailm
>>>>>> an_listinfo_stir&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=G9v8uCSSQhCmpw7ItG
>>>>>> 0r2g&m=UhVA_2O-z5DN-Bdom_WhPcD_-4nWww1SYGSyTVjFPBA&s=NSOnsQJ832JfPXkcoe
>>>>>> qf68PvPzxIr21SPbpPP4dg270&e=
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> stir mailing list
>>>>>> stir@ietf.org
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> stir mailing list
>>>>> stir@ietf.org
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> stir mailing list
>>>> stir@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> stir mailing list
>>> stir@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> stir mailing list
>> stir@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir
> 