аЯрЁБс>ўџ 35ўџџџ2џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџьЅСM №Пяbjbjт=т= %*€W€Wяџџџџџџl8888888Lш ш ш ш є $LЄn$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ #%%%%%%$ 2<I8$ $ $ $ $ Iˆ 88$ $ ^ˆ ˆ ˆ $ .8$ 8$ #ˆ $ #ˆ Тˆ JУ88$  @˜д_ы>ТLœш R 6лt0Єу,nˆ nˆ LL8888йENUM FORUM CONTRIBUTION: Contribution #: SOURCE: AT&T Contributor: Penn Pfautz ppfautz@att.com +1-732-420-4962 DATE SUBMITTED: August 8, 2002 TITLE: Suggested talking points re NTIA Roundtable Technology Panel Questions This document is offered to the ENUM Forum as a basis for discussion and is not a binding proposal on AT&T. AT&T specifically reserves the right to amend or withdraw the statements contained herein. Indroduction This document suggests some points to be made in responding to the NTIA roundtable technology panel questions. 1. What is the vision behind ENUM? Why would customers want an ENUM-ready device or register their phone number with an ENUM service provider? (Does this vision include a way to facilitate communications via different networks worldwide?) Two basic threads here: the electronic business card and VOIP enabling. Re the latter: Plain phones are not going away soon Thus, even those with IP terminals will want a telephone number so as to reachable by those with only basic telephones So, phone numbers must be translated to IP addresses somehow, somewhere This could always be done at the point of interface associated with the PSTN provider of the number. For example, call to IP cable telephony users are delivered to an end office based on NPA-NXX assignments in the LERG and there routed to a gateway where translation to IP occurs This last resort translation (which must always be available) requires a call to route through the PSTN with the consequent expense and potential loss of enhanced functionality when the communication originates from an IP terminal So users will seek a means of translation that will allow them to dispense with the PSTN connection on IP-IP calls. Other forms of identification (e.g. SIP URIs) can be used on IP-IP calls but still require knowing the URI of the called party or knowing where to look for it. Carriers will also seek for reasons of arbitrage and network efficiency to terminate calls directly to IP end points where available ENUM provides a means of doing phone number to IP translation without being tied to a specific transport provider. (for carriers, this is a double-edge sword) 2. What is envisioned as the "killer application" of ENUM? What other services/capabilities will the ENUM protocol support or facilitate? 3. Are there other ways of doing what RFC 2916 (currently being considered by the IETF) is designed to accomplish? Are companies currently exploring ways to provide the services/capabilities that ENUM will make available through mechanisms that do not rely on telephone numbers or DNS addresses, or both? The fundamental alternative to ENUM per RFC2916 or last resort translation in the PSTN is some form of proprietary listing service. 4. Does implementation of ENUM require the adoption of a single, common or hierarchical architecture, such as that proposed by the IETF? What are the principal advantages and disadvantages of a single common or hierarchical architecture? Is there any technical or economic necessity for a single, common or hierarchical architecture? What ENUM is trying to do – expose (a pointer to) alternate means for communicating with the assignee of the E.164 number. (In the PSTN, communication is generally constrained to be through the circuit switched network to which the E.164 number is assigned or ported to using that network operator’s designated point-of-interface, usually and End Office of Tandem switch.) This is inherently pro-competitive. For the pointer to be effective, potential callers must be able to find it. This suggests use of a single DNS tree for numbers. There is a tradeoff between this efficiency and competition. The proposed ENUM structure attempts to balance the goals of efficiency (and authoritativeness – here defined as conforming to the wishes of the number assignee) by keeping the essential unitary cooperative structure (Tier 0 and Tier 1) to a minimum while letting any provider (including the assignee him/herself) offer effective service at Tier 2 based on this infrastructure. This is essentially similar to the balance that the separation of Registrars from the Registry has attempted to strike in existing domain name regulation. The alternative of separate listing services that combine the functions of all Tiers in a single proprietary domain provides competition at a gross level but is much more likely to result in effective monopoly or oligopoly at the customer level. This is because where users must determine which domain to query they will tend to query those thought to have more registrations. By a positive feedback process this will result in at best an oligopoly and more likely an unregulated monopoly. With the single hierarchy, listing in any Tier 2 is just as accessible as any other, reducing the barriers to market entry. 5. If RFC 2916 is adopted, will other methods or mechanisms be precluded or become less viable? Implementation of ENUM per RFC 2916 precludes nothing. ENUM is opt-in both for the number assignee and for the entity initiating communication. The cross elasticity of ENUM and private listing services, whether based on DNS technology or something else is a matter for the marketplace to decide. 6. Should the U.S. decide to opt-in to RFC 2916? What are the advantages or disadvantages to this decision? The U.S. should opt-in to ENUM per RFC 2916. The advantages include: Stimulation of new services and demand for broadband Consumer protection based on a cooperative Tier 1 Registry that can enforce privacy rules and facilitate competition at Tier 2, avoiding the tendency toward oligopoly or monopoly in which the alternative may result. Conformity with emerging international standards that will enhance American ability to compete in world markets ГжзVHIН X/0“’Люяї№хн№з№в№ЧТЗЧЗЧЗЧЗЋЗЧ>*CJOJQJ^JaJCJOJQJ^JaJCJaJCJOJQJ^JaJOJQJ 5CJ^J5OJQJ^J5>*OJQJ\^J OJQJ^JCJ OJQJ^J89:;<IJKewŠ‘’БВГњјњчњјккјаајЦЦЦјајаај „а„а^„а`„а &dPЦџ $&d PЦџ a$$ Ц„„„^„`„a$$a$яўГ     жзхцUV—н%HѕѓѓщщщщщщщщщщщмзеѓѓѓЯЯЯЯ7$8$H$$a$ $ Цf!„0§]„0§a$ $dNЦџ „ „`њ^„ `„`њHIЁЦ=… „ ј ™  Н О П Р С Т  B N O  б ^Iљљєєєєєєєєєљљљљљљљљљљљљљљєљљ & F7$8$H$I‘иWXЮЯѓєШ/01q’“ЛМќ*+pЅ}эюяљљљљљїїїїїїїљљљљљљљљљљэээљї & F7$8$H$7$8$H$#0PАа/ Ар=!А"А# $ %А i8@ёџ8 NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH @@@ Heading 1$@&5CJOJQJaJ<A@ђџЁ< Default Paragraph Font‚ђ‚ /Header,h,Header/Footer,header odd,header,Hyphen  ЦрР!aJD>D Title$Є№Є<a$5CJ KHOJQJaJ@C@ Body Text Indent „n^„naJBўO"B bullet$„„˜ў^„`„˜ўa$ OJQJaJя*џџџџ89:;<IJKewŠ‘’БВГ     жзхцUV—н%HIЁЦ=…„ј™НОПРСТ B N O  б  ^    I ‘ и  W X Ю Я ѓ є Ш/01q’“ЛМќ*+pЅ}эюё˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€0€€˜0€€š0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜ 0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜0€€˜0€€яГHIяя,7иф $ё7нх$%(y‚’• B L Š   š Ч а б к   ^ e   Љ A H I O б з и к  # ˆ ” €‘qzќЎИё333333333333333333333333џџAT&TMC:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Word\AutoRecovery save of Document1.asdAT&TC:\windows\Desktop\NTIA-plp.docAT&TC:\windows\Desktop\NTIA-plp.docAT&TLC:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Word\AutoRecovery save of NTIA-plp.asdAT&TC:\windows\Desktop\NTIA-plp.docAT&TC:\windows\Desktop\NTIA-plp.docAT&TC:\windows\Desktop\NTIA-plp.docІs‹\Јфџџџџџџџџџh „а„˜ўЦа^„а`„˜ўOJQJo(З№h „ „˜ўЦ ^„ `„˜ўOJQJo(oh „p„˜ўЦp^„p`„˜ўOJQJo(Ї№h „@ „˜ўЦ@ ^„@ `„˜ўOJQJo(З№h „„˜ўЦ^„`„˜ўOJQJo(oh „р„˜ўЦр^„р`„˜ўOJQJo(Ї№h „А„˜ўЦА^„А`„˜ўOJQJo(З№h „€„˜ўЦ€^„€`„˜ўOJQJo(oh „P„˜ўЦP^„P`„˜ўOJQJo(Ї№Іs‹џџџџџџџџ         Vёнџ@€44аŸd4я@@џџUnknownџџџџџџџџџџџџG‡:џTimes New Roman5€Symbol3& ‡:џArial?5 ‡:џCourier New;"Helvetica;€Wingdings"qˆ№аhfhІЕBh† Qщ (!№ ДД20d92ƒq№џџ1AT&TAT&Tўџ р…ŸђљOhЋ‘+'Гй0d˜ЄАРЬиш ј  , 8DLT\ф1ssAT&TfT&TT&TNormalAT&Tl5&TMicrosoft Word 9.0@Рhx@ьVб):Т@юJы>ТQщўџ еЭеœ.“—+,љЎ0ь hp€ˆ˜  ЈАИ Р ЮфAT&Titl( 9э 1 Title ўџџџ !ўџџџ#$%&'()ўџџџ+,-./01ўџџџ§џџџ4ўџџџўџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџRoot Entryџџџџџџџџ РF@˜д_ы>Т6€1TableџџџџџџџџџџџџnWordDocumentџџџџџџџџ%*SummaryInformation(џџџџ"DocumentSummaryInformation8џџџџџџџџџџџџ*CompObjџџџџjObjectPoolџџџџџџџџџџџџ@˜д_ы>Т@˜д_ы>Тџџџџџџџџџџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџўџ џџџџ РFMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8є9Вq