| At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
|
|
|
|
ENUM Delegation
posted by michael on Friday March 29 2002, @04:09AM
rfassett writes "The requests for ENUM delegation for specific country codes has picked up. A composite list of requests accepted by RIPE and forwarded on to the Telecommunications Standardization Bureau can be found here. If I understand the process correctly, these are each now each within the 60 day review window where anyone with objections can post publicly to enum-request@ripe.net for consideration
The delegation requests have also brought some clarity to how this process works."
|
|
 |
 |
It appears that first a government must notify the ITU’s Telecommunications Standardization Bureau (TSB) of its desire to have its country code delegated within ENUM. Then, only an entity approved by this government will have its request forwarded by RIPE to the TSB without objection.
If a government has not formally announced its desire to participate with ENUM (presumably to the TSB) then any request for delegation is promptly objected to by Richard Hill of the ITU and Counselor of the TSB. Further, if a government has agreed to delegation but the requester is not the entity authorized to do so by the government, then it appears this request will also be objected to by Richard Hill. This example surfaced when TLD Networks of the U.K requested delegation for 4.4.e164.arpa on February 23 and received the following objection February 26:
"The ITU Telecommunications Standardization Bureau (TSB) objects to thisrequest because no approval for delegation of the code 44 has yet been received from the concerned country, the United Kingdom.
According to information received by TSB, it does not appear that the
requestor is the organization that might in the future receive approval for a delegation by the United Kingdom."
But, on February 28 the U.K. Department of Industry and Trade submitted its request for delegation of 4.4.e164.arpa and on March 17 RIPE passed along the request to the TSB without any objection from Richard Hill. So, one must assume that the United Kingdom approved delegation for ENUM between February 26 and February 28 and that the TSB was already notified that the U.K. Department of Industry and Trade was the authorized entity to make such a request. Thus, no objections.
The Institute of Computer Science for the Greek government requested 0.3.e164.arpa. Richard Hill objected to this on the basis the Greek government had not notified the TSB of its desire for ENUM delegation. The China Internet Network Information Center must have fallen into this same trap as its request for 6.8.e164.arpa was also objected. Each of these entities is a formal agency of their respective governments.
This pretty much explains the process for ENUM delegation, sort of.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
[ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]
|
|
| |
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
ENUM Delegation
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 10 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
it's hard to keep everybody straight. But it appears the TLD Networks noted above is the same TLD Networks recently shut down by a U.S. District Court at the request of the FTC. The FTC alleges that the companies violated federal law by failing to disclose on their Web sites that the domain names they were selling (.usa, .brit, etc) were not useable on the Internet, and by sending the deceptive spam.
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
 |
Well, imagine that. enum.info actually points to a functional site carrying information about ENUM. This is an egregious misuse of the namespace. Following standard procedure it should have been sold to some speculator who would leave it unused. -g
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| | 1 reply beneath your current threshold. |

Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|