EREG IRIS for ENUM Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> 58 th IETF, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
ereg iris for enum
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

EREG IRIS for ENUM Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> 58 th IETF, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 19, 2023 636 likes •740 views

EREG IRIS for ENUM Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> 58 th IETF, Minneapolis, MN, USA 11 November 2003 Quick Update CRISP WG base requirements done protocol selection done moving forward with IRIS

slide-1
SLIDE 1

EREG – IRIS for ENUM

Andrew Newton <andy@hxr.us> 58th IETF, Minneapolis, MN, USA 11 – November – 2003

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Quick Update

  • CRISP WG

– base requirements done – protocol selection done – moving forward with IRIS

  • draft-newton-iris-ereg-01.txt

– incorporated comments received for –00. – removed cruft from section 6 – updated to be current with iris-core -04

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Motivation

Why? Who? What?

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Why?

  • Is a whois service needed for ENUM?

– Will ENUM just be a small community of providers? – Will all ENUM interactions remain intra- national?

  • cross-border abuse?
  • cross-border coordination?

– Will there be delegations to private entities?

  • b2b & e2e coordination?
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Who?

  • Who will resolve ENUM problems?

– To resolve an issue, does the end-point sys admin have to rely on the upward chain?

  • Who do you contact?

– Large network operators have different sys admins for different purposes: abuse, noc, etc…

  • Which one is which?

– Is that SOA a SIP address or an SMTP address or an XMPP address?

slide-6
SLIDE 6

What?

  • Just what can go wrong?

– Messed up MX records are fairly common, so what’s the likelihood of encountering a messed up NAPTR or SRV record? – Will fat-fingering cause incorrect delegations

  • r bad NS sets at the zone apex?
  • What will we do about abuse?

– Will ENUM will be easy prey for war-dialing spammers?

slide-7
SLIDE 7

This Proposal

  • Specifies a vector for coordination.

– Not mandating “the” vector for coordination.

  • Is one part of the answer.

– No protocol/technology can be the whole answer. – Policy plays a major role.

  • Attempts to be policy-neutral.

– Providers have differing requirements based on jurisdiction.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Applicability

  • Public-facing

– account for data miners and abusive users

  • Privacy

– pluggable authentication for adaptable authorization

  • Structured

– well-understood multiple methods of alternative contact – I18N

  • localization of protocol elements
  • multiple language contact equivalents

– standard queries and results