Subject: RE: [Iptel] comments on draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np-02.txt

From: "Yu, James" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:05:27 -0400

Juha,

Sorry to respond late.  I saw your message just now.

The purpose of the I-D is to propose the "rn", "cic" and "npdi" parameters to the "tel" URI.    The "rn" will carry either a routing number or routing prefix that allows call routing to be done when the "rn" parameter is used.   Although the scope is limited to geographical numbers and freephone numbers, the proposed parameters can be used by other types of phone numbers (e.g., mobile numbers) that also use routing number/prefix in addition to the phone number to support number portability.    For example, the proposed parameters certainly can be used by mobile numbers, geographical or non-geographical (e.g., those in W. Europe), if the ported mobile numbers have associated routing numbers/prefixes.  I can add some texts about this fact.   The "700 numbers" you mentioned are not subject to number portability.  My understanding is that the "700" numbers in the U.S. are long-distance carrier-specific and the call routing is based on the pre-subscription.  They cannot be ported.

If you see other types of phone numbers will require additional parameters, I'll welcome your comments/inputs, or you can draft an I-D to add the new parameters.

In terms of your remark on my company, I'd like to say that NeuStar's major role in number portability is the number portability administration that handles the porting transactions among the operators/service providers and broadcasting the porting/routing information to the parties who need the information and are authorized to receive the information to handle the call/message routing.

We authored the I-D for the benefit of the industry, not for the private need/use of NeuStar.  

James
-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
Juha Heinanen
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 3:45 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Iptel] comments on draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np-02.txt 

i also started to read "New Parameters for the "tel" URI to Support Number
Portability" draft, but didn't get all the way through.  the reason was
that i got pissed off by the narrow scope of "number portability" in the
draft.

why does it only deal with number portability related to "geographical
telephone numbers and freephone numbers"?  also mobile numbers and 700
numbers can and are heavily ported all over the world.  in some countries
it is also possible to port either a landline or mobile phone number to
internet.  why can't there be a general number portability indication
mechanish covering any kind of number portability?

i vote for junking this draft until it covers any kind of number
portability.   i get a feeling that this draft tries to solve some narrow
problem that the author or his company has.   at minimum, its name must be
changed because it is highly misleading.

-- juha

_______________________________________________
Iptel mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel

_______________________________________________
Iptel mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel