Re: e164.isc.org strengths (was Re: Getting NANPA to designate a non-geographic area code?)

[Duane <support@e164.org>]

Paul Vixie wrote:

> I'm concerned that the power of DNS is not being applied to the needs of ENUM,
> and that whereas I will want 3.1.3.2.4.0.5.6.1.e164.arpa to be delegated to
> me with some NS RRs so that I can control my per-number SRV/NAPTR/whatever by
> editing local zone files and hitting the "reload" button on my name server,
> the people who control 1.e164.arpa (or 0.5.6.1.e164.arpa or whatever) will
> want me to register each of my SRV/NAPTR/whatever RRs with them.  If you're
> correct that this is how e164.org works, then that pretty much answers my
> previous question ("why isn't e164.org taking the world by storm?")

Ok been playing with, and had a friend verify this so I was sure before 
I inserted my foot into my mouth, issuing of small chunks of numbers 
shouldn't be too much of an issue. However in the case of providers with 
10k blocks of numbers or bigger, and with end users wanting to setup 
their own routes this does become a problem.

Bind9 won't match wildcards for more finally defined numbers/blocks if 
there is a NS record higher up the tree, the search hits the NS records 
and redirects to that instead of replying with anything else.

--
Best regards,
 Duane

http://www.cacert.org - Free Security Certificates
http://www.nodedb.com - Think globally, network locally
http://www.sydneywireless.com - Telecommunications Freedom
http://happysnapper.com.au - Sell your photos over the net!
http://e164.org - Using Enum.164 to interconnect asterisk servers

--
To unsubscribe send a message to voip-peering-request@psg.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
An archive is at <http://psg.com/lists/voip-peering/>.