Subject: Re: [Enum] Re: [voipeer] Re: [Geopriv] Re: [Simple] tel URIs in common policy

From: David Meyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:11:26 -0700

On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 09:30:38AM -0400, [email-masked] wrote:
> In a message dated 8/21/2005 5:01:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> [email-masked] writes:
> 
> 
> > Anybody using a softclient, be it on a laptop, PDA or softphone
> > should use the same practice like on mobile phone, entering E.164 numbers 
> > ONLY (or preferably) in the international format with the leading "+"
> > 
> > Nevertheless, there are still may POTS phones out using terminal adapters
> > capable only of entering digits aad * and #.
> > 
> > So you MUST use a dialing plan and this can only be a national, local or
> > private dialing plan, because NO international dialing plan exists.
> > 
> 
> In the E164 plan, there was never any intention that the caller would 
> actually dial a "+". It is only a way to represent numbers when written (like on 
> letterhead). The "+" can be thought of as representing the extra digits for the 
> international prefix that you must dial according to the local dialing plan 
> before you dial the number which follows the "+". Since it's different in various 
> countries, it shouldn't be written as a part of the number.
> 
> There is no need to be able to enter a "+" on a keypad.

	Not sure about most, but I use  "+ <country code>" in
	front of every number I store in my GSM phone; this way
	I don't have to do any special dialing in most
	geographies in which I find myself (and my carrier is
	either present or has roaming agreements with someone who
	does).

	Dave
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:30:38 EDT

Mike Pierce

---

From: lconroy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 23:53:50 +0100

Hi David, folks

If they do nothing useful every again (which seems likely, IMHO),
ETSI/3GPP can be thanked for specifying '+' and its interpretation
in the GSM specs, and for the members who built GSM phones who
implemented the spec.

Let's face it, Virtual Home Environment just doesn't get implemented
(and was as much of a source of hilarity as any IN-based architecture
  document can be).

Thus one big reason for putting a + at the start of ALL diallable  
numbers
in one's address book is clueless roaming agreements that mean one  
doesn't
know (unless one checks the SPAM texts one receives closely) whether the
dialling plan one should use whilst roaming in this network:

- treats UK numbers as "national" (and in-country numbers need to be
   dialled in full international format), or

- country-local numbers are treated as national, with UK numbers needing
   full international format.

Thank you so much for that guys. Travelling by train back from the ICANN
meeting was fun, whilst calling people in the UK and France. It would  
appear
that certain operators still can't find their a** even with a sign to  
help them.

Using national format in diallable numbers in address books are a bad  
idea;
+ is your friend. I mean, some benighted countries don't even use 00
as an international dialling access code - duh!

Oh, and BTW, '+' IS a on the keypad of every phone I've used.
If it isn't on yours, may I respectfully suggest that you find the
phone vendor/operator and express your displeasure forcefully, prior
to getting a real phone.

>     either present or has roaming agreements with someone who

all the best,
  Lawrence