Giving ENUM a helping hand


Telecom carriers are finally banding together and giving a concerted push to ENUM, a new kind of numbering system that allows folks to associate domain names and telephone numbers. Those who are trying to push ENUM are sworn enemies like AT&T,, MCI, SBC Laboratories, Sprint, and Verizon. In order to get the momentum behind ENUM, a new group, the Country Code 1 ENUM Limited Liability Company (CC1 ENUM LLC), is going to work with countries in the North American Numbering Plan (NANP), which includes the United States, Canada and the Caribbean nations. A common ENUM system becomes more necessary as applications like voice-over-IP (VoIP) become more widely adopted, Telephony magazine writes. ENUM push comes at a time, when start-up, Popular Telephony is pushing its own numbering system, GNUP, which calls for folks to use Peerio discovery algorithm. As we have noted in recent days, the whole concept of numbering has become a bit of a nightmare. Aswath, has summed up the current state of affairs with numbers, addressing and all related issues in this excellent post. (What else would you expect?) I think we are ways to go before we address these issues.


VoIP Dude

I place no faith whatsoever in AT&T,, 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 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 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??


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?

Comments are closed.