Don Gould wrote:
I'm sorry but I really feel a call to order is
I've read over half the posts in this thread and
see no reason for false
False accusations ? the thing I'm finding is that people are asking for
more information and we are getting 'yes yes, we will give you the
information if you ask for it !' which isn't actually giving anyone
anything about the intentions behind the application. This is very
typical of commercial entities (and infact, anyone trying to divert
attention away from something) when they are about to do something that
will not necessarily be in the publics best interest. This has been an
exceedingly common tactic in the NZ Internet industry since it started.
The lack of any positive from JONES JAMES F and the ability to silently
sidestep any real questions on his companies intentions for the enum
allocation raise warning bells in my mind.
I guess you've got a different outlook. Good for you, at least you're
still smiling as you get shafted.
How about outlining how you'd like to see the
system used in NZ?
I really don't think it will ever get used, which is probably for the
best. I also think allocating/activating it with no set plan as to how
this is going to be implemented is dangerous. All it would take is a
reasonably large carrier (verizon ? etc..) to perform a lookup, get a
response and incorrectly route a call and you'd end up with chaos
(keeping in mind that this is _supposed_ to be an official way route
PSTN allocated numbers via IP). How are number allocations going to be
handled ? how about coping with number portability ? do we sub delegate
based on the NAD ? if the NAD has control then why is a
private/commercial entity looking after the allocation ? is this entity
going to charge to gain access to this system (even tho its open ! yay
for word games) and if so, how much and will any charges slow adoption ?
oh, and answering Craigs questions would also be nice.
How about putting a shout out for support for your
I dont have any ideas other than 'it should be allocated to the
MED/DNC/Peter Mott in order to stop this sort of thing from happening.
Seems to me that there are people here who are just
someone's trying to do something with this enum stuff.
Yup, what a wonderful conclusion you've come to. I'd just like to make
sure that a system such as enum, that is seen as a standard (with a low
uptake, granted) does not fall in to the hands of some crowd that will
in all likely-hood exploit it to make $$, prove to me that this is NOT
the case and i'll happily shut up. (and yeah, I know there are checks
around the allocations and I would _hope_ that they all work swimmingly,
but call be a skeptic - especially when there are names such as
Alcatel-Lucent and Telecom NZ behind the application based on the
original e-mail sent to the list)
How about getting this thread moving back in a
positive direction rather
than a pointless flame?!
I find anything questioning why a public standard falls under the
control of an unknown commercial entity, in order to line someones
pockets, to have a reasonably valid point. If you see this as being
pointless, then feel free to use your delete button or ignore the thread.
I know, doom and gloom - but I have yet to meet anyone that can predict
the future and looking back after the fact and saying 'oops, we maybe
shouldn't have done that' doesn't really help things move forward. The
NZ Internet industry has done that too often in the past, why are we
doing it again now ?