From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Thu Aug 1 03:36:39 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA06872 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 03:36:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id DAA18447 for enum-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 03:37:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA18360; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 03:35:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA18327 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 03:35:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ams-msg-core-1.cisco.com (ams-msg-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.74.60]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA06302 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 03:34:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xbe-lon-303.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ams-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g717Xi85002125; Thu, 1 Aug 2002 09:33:49 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from xfe-ams-302.cisco.com ([144.254.75.89]) by xbe-lon-303.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4453); Thu, 1 Aug 2002 08:34:36 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.4] ([144.254.74.55]) by xfe-ams-302.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4453); Thu, 1 Aug 2002 09:34:35 +0200 Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 09:11:18 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= To: Lawrence Conroy , enum@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Enum] enum uri considered harmful? Message-ID: <15589567.1028193078@localhost> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.0 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Aug 2002 07:34:35.0975 (UTC) FILETIME=[E2B6FD70:01C2392D] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 2002-07-30 16.54 +0100 Lawrence Conroy wrote: > Well...Unless someone can give answers to these points, > I am not happy with this - IMHO enum: is not the same as > tel: ; enum=yes. And default is enum=yes I presume. Else we will not be able to start use ENUM for existing tel: URI's out there. paf _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Fri Aug 2 16:43:54 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA05696 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 16:43:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id QAA07033 for enum-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 16:45:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA06945; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 16:42:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA06915 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 16:42:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oak.neustar.com (oak.neustar.com [209.173.53.70]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA05612 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 16:41:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dick.neustar.com (stih650b-eth-s1p2c0.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.65]) by oak.neustar.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id g72KgAD10751; Fri, 2 Aug 2002 20:42:10 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020802164604.02353330@popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 16:49:34 -0400 To: enum@ietf.org From: Richard Shockey Cc: paf@cisco.com, sob@harvard.edu, mankin@isi.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Enum] Conclusion of Last Call : Number Portability in the GSTN: An Overview Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org The 2 week period for Working Group Last call having expired with no additional comments or proposed revisions the chairs will send the following document to the IESG for review and IESG last call. Title : Number Portability in the GSTN: An Overview Author(s) : M. Foster, T. McGarry, J. Yu Filename : draft-ietf-enum-e164-gstn-np-05.txt Pages : 27 Date : 27-Jun-02 A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-enum-e164-gstn-np-05.txt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 46000 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 10 Sterling, VA 20166 Voice +1 571.434.5651 Cell : +1 314.503.0640, Fax: +1 815.333.1237 or ; ; <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Thu Aug 8 09:59:43 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA12559 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:59:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id KAA03269 for enum-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 10:00:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA02580; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:54:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA02550 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:54:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from oak.neustar.com (oak.neustar.com [209.173.53.70]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11936 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 09:53:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dick.neustar.com (stih650b-eth-s1p2c0.va.neustar.com [209.173.53.65]) by oak.neustar.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id g78Ds1g30617 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 13:54:01 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020808095949.022c8500@popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 10:01:28 -0400 To: enum@ietf.org From: Richard Shockey Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id JAA02551 Subject: [Enum] Preliminary notes from IETF ENUM WG meeting in Yokohama Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Once again thanks to Jay Hilton for a excellent job of note taking... If you have any comments additions or clarifications please post. ############# 1.0 AGENDA BASHING Richard Shockey (Neustar) and Patrik Falstrom (Cisco) co-chairs. Agenda accepted w/o modification. 1.1 IU-T SG2 developments: SG2 has reached temporary agreement on registration of national country codes in e.164arpa. Six nation states have registered so far. Population of e164.arpa is proceeding. We need to come to agreement on ABNF syntax. (See below). Patrik Falstrom: RFC2916bis agreement could be submitted to the next SG2 meeting if we can get agreement before next SG2 meeting. 2.0 RFC2916bis -01 REV - Faltstrom/Mealing The goal of these discussions is to give the document authors definitive direction on the draft so that it can begin to move forward with all deliberate speed. The 01 revision is in the hopper so we should see it shortly. Patrik Falstrom: The ABNF Syntax is as follows: service_field = “E2U” 1*(“+” enumservice) Enumservice = service [“:” protocol] Service = 1*32(alpha / digit) Protocol = 1*32(alpha / digit) Want to get agreement on the definition of “service” and “protocol”. Services will have to be registered via an RFC (one service per RFC). Many people on mail list want to be more specific on the definition of service and protocol. 2.1 DISCUSSION: Jon Peterson: which should be the mandatory element, service or protocol or both? Will 2916 define this? What will the URIs tell us about the service? Patrik Falstrom: We are describing the URI, i.e. what might be reached when you go to this URI. Dave Crocker: URIs are used in two different ways. One talks about the service and the other talks about the protocol. Rich Shockey: We are defining a verbose description of the namespace. Dave Crocker: We need a three level name space definition. Andy Z: Level of specificity is up to the service provider to define. PF: The namespace is used to describe the URI. JP: Whatever it is that is being represented by the description should have whatever level of specificity that is required to fully define the URI. Andy Z: We are really trying to define the service behind the URI. Richard Stazney: The subscriber wants a service that could have multiple URIs. We should stay with the generic services in RFCs. We should have a common consensus of how to write these things. Need a general principle agreed to go forward. JP: Leave it up to people as to how they want to define these things. Want to be able to just specify E2U + sip. Greg V: May need to repost an expired Operations Document that addresses issues we may need to discuss. 3. The ENUMSERVICE's documents [Stastny/Conroy/Brandner] It is clear from the mail list discussions that these documents have generated the most discussion and we want this meeting in Yokohama to come to some reasonable consensus on the next steps for these documents. We are close to agreement on several points but we have several proposals on what is the proper ABNF syntax to use and the exact terms and definitions to be used in describing the data elements. For instance, there is still disagreement on URI scheme vs. a more expanded 'protocol' element for the mandatory portion of the enumservice field. Presenters were asked to be prepared to precisely define their proposals and the rationale for them. 3.1 Categorical enumservices (This was discussed right after the 2916bis discussions) http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-brandner-enum-categorical-enumservices-00.txt This document defines the set of enumservices describing "high level" communications categories. These are used as elements within the services field of NAPTR resource records within ENUM domain space. Each category identifies a kind of communications service in which an end user might want to engage using the associated resource. It includes the expected "low level" service that comes under each category, together with a list of the URI schemes that are appropriate for use with each categorical enumservice. Uses matrices that have low-level teleservices like voice, video, fax, etc. Or high-level categories (groups) like talk, msg, info , etc. RS: What is a specific syntax that you would propose? What PF has proposed, will it meet your needs? Rudy: Yes the proposal will meet this need. RS: How many fields are necessary to describe the options you are trying to define (PF provides two in 2916bis now). Rudy: 2 would be okay. JP: Do you want to limit what could be in the service/protocol fields? Rudy: Yes, want to limit what can be there. Want to keep generality. JP: Concern that generality proposed will allow you to define accurately what is expected / provided with the URI. Comes down to what is innate to these URIs. Should not limit what goes into foo (the mandatory side of the enumservice). Andy Z: If we can support E2U + sip, then that would solve the concern. RS: sip can be service and protocol at the same time. PF: You can have E2U+voice:sip E2U+voice:h323 E2U+sip E2U+voice:sip+sip+voice:sip:rtp Scott Bradner: It seems that Andy and PF are saying the same thing. Richard Stazney: We do not need to be specifying protocols, this is not a problem for enum. Dave Crocker: We need to have a concrete use in mind to go forward. Syntax needs a specific use to make sense. Proposal to create some concrete proposals for real use and that will help you define the syntax. We are having an abstract naming debate w/o these concrete uses. Dave C: Sounds like we do not have specific requirements. We will loose time and resources until we define these concrete examples. PF and RS: We have several specific examples on the mail list and in earlier drafts. Andy: There are least two camps that want to use enum. One that already knows what protocol they are looking for. The other is that it has an idea, but not specific idea of what will be used. JP: Do not feel this is just a name space problem. We need to tell the client what to do with the information. People will use this string to arrive at a record. RS: No consensus yet. Do we need to specifically define foo and bar? PF: Can we come up with a proposal to specify what foo and bar mean to the mailing list? We need to include this in 2916bis. Andy Z: foo and bar should be in order if there is a hierarchical reason. Scott B: I have not seen a set of requirements yet to bound this discussion. We may be putting the cart before the horse. R Stazney: We can come up with examples. And also, he feels that the foo defines the bar. PF: That is what 2916bis says at this time. Greg V: I have a draft in development (VPIM?) that is waiting on syntax. Need syntax, just decide so we can go forward. R Shockey: If we are going to go more hierarchical … Andy: Hierarchy is the rat hole we have been in for months on the list. Greg: Looking for a tag for enumservice to define services. Do not see nay examples where a client has any benefit in using a hierarchy. J Peterson: Lets go ahead and look at a document that looks at various foos and bars. We seem to agree on the definition and level of agreement in 2916bis. Proposal from Patrik: A: Service_field = “E2U 1*(“+” enumservice) enumservice = foo*[bar] foo = 1*32(ALPHA / DIGIT) bar = “:” foo B: Service_field = “E2U 1*(“+” enumservice) enumservice = 1*32(ALPHA /DIGIT) Richard Shockey: Do we have consensus that A represents how 2916bis should be structured? Hum was yes, no negatives! AGREEMENT!!! Greg: There is no issue of sub addressing in the document. In the world of PBXs, this could be an issue. Greg will provide some text to progress this issue. RShockey: Are there any other IANA requirements for registration? None identified. 3.2 Scenarios for ENUM and ENUM-like Systems http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-stastny-enum-scenarios-00.txt (Informational) This is an informational document and was noted, but not discussed. This document analyzes scenarios for ENUM and ENUM-like Systems, both for ENUM used by End Users and also for ENUM-like Systems used by operators for network-specific or infrastructure purposes. It also gives some examples of ENUM Usage and proposes a new URI scheme to be used with ENUM. This may allow a way forward for the definition of ENUM Services and also for the definition of the required URIs and their parameters. This document therefore deals with information stored in the ENUM and the look-up process and the usage of the information retrieved in this look up process. It does not deal with the administrative process related to the population of the relevant zones. 3.3 Analysis of the Usage of ENUM and ENUM Services http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-stastny-enum-services-analysis-00.txt (Informational) This is an informational document and was noted, but not discussed. This document analyzes the usage of the URI-schemes, services and "enumservices" under discussion for the ENUM System. It tries to combine the existing proposals for "enumservices" and proposes examples of a compatible approach as a way forward for the definition of the "enumservices" to be used in the ENUM trials planned. 4. The 'enum' URI http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-brandner-enum-uri-00.txt This document specifies the "enum:" URI scheme. This URI is intended for use where a resource can be returned by evaluating the URI value using the ENUM DDDS application. It also includes a definition of an optional URI parameter to indicate a list of enumservices that should be considered in the returned response to the ENUM query. Syntactically, it uses a subset of the format defined for the "tel:" URI scheme. PF: This implies a different interpretation of the tel URI inside or outside of the lookup scheme. Also, are you somehow concatenating all of the tel URIs? RStazney: One reason for the enum URI is to clarify when to go to enum and when you can just dial a number using the tel URI. PF: Are you saying that the Tel URI means do not do an enum query? RShockey: Not necessarily. PF: This means that the context determines when the tel URI means to stop. Jpeterson: This should be tel URI parameters (RFC2806bis needs to have these), not enum. Rstazney: A tel URI gives you a telephone number. Andy: This is a good time to add this parameter to the Tel URI RFC. RShockey: We need to take this to the list. 5.0 OPTIONAL IF there is any time left Did not have time for this discussion. The tel URI... http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-brandner-tel-svc-00.txt This document describes the 'svc' parameter for use within a 'tel:' URI. This is intended to indicate the uses to which a resource identified in the 'tel:' URI can be put. It is an optional parameter, and if not understood can be ignored. It allows the user to "hint" at the features supported at the resource. There are guidelines for how this parameter might be used, and for expected behavior on detection of this parameter. - End of Notes - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 46000 Center Oak Plaza Bldg 10 Sterling, VA 20166 Voice +1 571.434.5651 Cell : +1 314.503.0640, Fax: +1 815.333.1237 or ; ; <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Thu Aug 8 19:03:01 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA00118 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 19:03:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id TAA08441 for enum-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 19:04:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA08352; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 19:01:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA08321 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 19:01:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailrelay1.ornis.com (mailrelay1.ornis.com [195.101.197.41]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA00046 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 19:00:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Alain.Doisneau@art-telecom.fr Received: from mailgate1.mc2.net ([194.133.125.99]) by mailrelay1.ornis.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g78N1Mpp030056 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 01:01:22 +0200 Received: from Intranet ([10.180.101.25]) by mailgate1.mc2.net (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g78N1LOH028329 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 01:01:22 +0200 To: enum@ietf.org Message-ID: Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 01:00:30 +0200 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Intranet/ART(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 09/08/2002 01:00:32 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id TAA08322 Subject: [Enum] Alain Doisneau/ART est absent(e). Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Je serai absent(e) du 06/08/2002 au 28/08/2002. Je répondrai à votre message dès mon retour. I will answer your message when I come back (August 28) _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Sun Aug 11 19:02:46 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA23417 for ; Sun, 11 Aug 2002 19:02:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id TAA22473 for enum-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 11 Aug 2002 19:04:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA22390; Sun, 11 Aug 2002 19:02:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA22359 for ; Sun, 11 Aug 2002 19:02:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailrelay1.ornis.com (mailrelay1.ornis.com [195.101.197.41]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA23355 for ; Sun, 11 Aug 2002 19:01:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Stanislas.Bourgain@art-telecom.fr Received: from mailgate1.mc2.net ([194.133.125.99]) by mailrelay1.ornis.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g7BN2Npp026185 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 01:02:23 +0200 Received: from Intranet ([10.180.101.25]) by mailgate1.mc2.net (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g7BN2MOF011183 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 01:02:23 +0200 To: enum@ietf.org Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 01:01:30 +0200 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Intranet/ART(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 12/08/2002 01:01:31 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Enum] Stanislas Bourgain/ART est absent(e). Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: Enum Discussion List X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org Je serai absent(e) du 09/08/2002 au 26/08/2002. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Aug 27 15:36:09 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA09057 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:36:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7RJbDR29868 for enum-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:37:13 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RJb0o29551; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:37:00 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RJGeo28133 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:16:40 -0400 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06546 for <1timer>; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:44:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200208271844.OAA06546@ietf.org> From: Phil Roberts To: IETF WG Participants: ; Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:44:44 -0400 Subject: [Enum] Nomcom call for volunteers Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Enum Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , The members of the IESG and IAB and the IETF chair are selected by a nominations committee made up of volunteers from the IETF community. The nominations committee is now in the process of being formed and volunteers are being accepted until Sep 6. Please see (http://www.ietf.org/nomcom/msg19765.html) for information if you are interested in volunteering to be on the nominations committee. _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Aug 29 07:52:40 2002 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA17128 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 07:52:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7TBreL07560 for enum-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 07:53:40 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7TBrQo07550; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 07:53:26 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7TBkfo07342 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 07:46:41 -0400 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA16779; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 07:45:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200208291145.HAA16779@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: enum@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 07:45:08 -0400 Subject: [Enum] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-enum-epp-e164-01.txt Sender: enum-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: enum-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Enum Discussion List List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Telephone Number Mapping Working Group of the IETF. Title : Extensible Provisioning Protocol E.164 Number Mapping Author(s) : S. Hollenbeck Filename : draft-ietf-enum-epp-e164-01.txt Pages : 20 Date : 2002-8-28 This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extension mapping for the provisioning and management of E.164 numbers representing domain names stored in a shared central repository. Specified in XML, this mapping extends the EPP domain name mapping to provide additional features required for the provisioning of E.164 numbers. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-enum-epp-e164-01.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-enum-epp-e164-01.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-enum-epp-e164-01.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2002-8-28160422.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-enum-epp-e164-01.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-enum-epp-e164-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2002-8-28160422.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum