2 thoughts on “Giving ENUM a helping hand”

  1. It is interesting to note that in an early paragraph of the press release PT claims that because “…standards-based applications required a DNS or Proxy infrastructure…PSTN and Mobile users were unable to directly reach VoIP users without some form of media gateway.” (Oh really! not because of signaling mismatch and TDM/packet mismatch?)

    Then in the final paragraph, almost in the passing they state that “Calls between IP and PSTN are carried by GNUP’Ñ¢ partner service providers or through a GNUP-enabled media gateway.” How are they any different than any of the current crop of service providers?

  2. I place no faith whatsoever in AT&T, GoDaddy.com, MCI, SBC Laboratories, Sprint, Verizon banding together to pull VoIP networks into a collaborative future. Most of those folks are playing big time defense on VoIP. Where are the ITSPs who’d benefit the most? Where are the MSOs?

    Perhaps 1.e164.arpa will happen at some point but will in be 2005, 2006, 2007, or 2008? If there’s not some big Telcordia standard the ILECs can point to, will their telecom engineers hold it up from rolling out? 😉

    And the IETF ENUM group seems to be arguing over whether e164.arpa is for end-user registrations or for carriers to use. Depending what comes out of that who knows what public ENUM will be. Wireless carriers are already doing private ENUM for MMS (pictures) – so perhaps private ENUM will be the future??

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.