Combined User and Carrier ENUM in e164.arpa draft-haberler-carrier-enum-01.html

1
Combined User andCarrier ENUM
ine164.arpadraft-haberler-carrier-enum-01.html

• Michael Haberler
• mah_at_inode.at
• 8.11.2005

2
What this is about

• Different entities need different resolution
  contexts (views), and separate control of
  TN-associated data
• Zone ownership precludes collapsing
  view-dependent data into a single zone
• A single tree is desirable for many reasons
  resolution rates, interoperability, economics
• This I-D introduced resolution contexts with
  separate management of a domain/TN
• Of which user and carrier are just two
• Implemented as branches with context as a label
• Common tree may either CONTAIN or REFER TO data
  from other contexts

3
Branching options where?
.
4
What changed

• -00 needed an external table documenting where
  contexts branch off
• -01 introduces the branch location in the DNS
  proper as a record at the CC level
• Only remaining assumption you know which part of
  a number is the CC
• Renamed subdomain location to branch location
• Usage example section with zone files
• A carrier of record definition

5
Requirements for branch location record

• Current
• Must specifiy position in number of label
  insertion integer value
• Possible refinements
• associate a label with a context name (eg for
  context carrier use label c)
• A zero-length label implies no label insertion
• define a different apex outside e164.arpa

6
Options for Branch Location Record

• Minimally carries an integer value (0..5)
• Options
• new RR type with integer payload
• NAPTR record carrying an integer
• S-NAPTR per rfc3958
• (TXT record, optionally key/value as per rfc1464)
• Let us know

7
Implementation status

• Interoperable implementations available for
• Asterisk http//bugs.digium.com/view.php?id5526
• OpenSER http//openser.org/pipermail/devel/2005-O
  ctober/000916.html
• Proof-of-concept http//mah.priv.at/enum/dist/
• All using TXT record for now
• No problems discovered

8
Proposed route

• Work in suggestions for BLR choice, generalize
  BLR
• Add detailed resolver behaviour highlighting
  changes to 3671
• I-D for DNS RR or (S-)NAPTR definition