Subject: Re: [GROW] Origination data tagging with the communities

From: Joe Abley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 09:20:14 -0400

On 26 Aug 2008, at 03:56, Matvey Teplov wrote:

> Some time ago there was a discussion over the origination tagging.  
> It took me a while to get through the draft publishing stages, but  
> finally it is in. Can you please review the document and send me  
> your comments. Draft is located at:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-teplov-grow-rfc4384-bis-00.txt

Section 3.3:

>> - Country - three digits of E.164 country code, e.g.: USA (001),  
>> Russia (007), UK (044), NL (031), PA (501). Countries should be  
>> linked to the regions in according to the scheme for geographic sub- 
>> regions used by the United Nations. To prevent misunderstanding no  
>> codes from this documents are used, but relations between the  
>> region and the country

While in some cases E.164 "country codes" do, indeed, map  
appropriately to a country, there are exceptions. The NANPA region is  
an obvious one ("001" is not "USA" -- it's a region that incorporates  
several countries of which the USA is just one).

> - State - code defined by the local internet authorities if needed

In the general case there is no such authority, surely.

> - City - three digits of intra-county city dialling code with the  
> padded to three leading zeros, e.g.: Amsterdam (020), Moscow (495),  
> Washington DC (202). If there is more than one code that is used  
> then local internet authorities should standardize such.

So, there's an assumption that a dial plan in a particular region  
works similarly to that in (say) the USA, and that the code for a city  
will not be longer than three digits?

What happens when a city dialling code is reassigned, as has happened  
in the UK several times over the last couple of decades?

What happens when two cities use the same dialling code? There are  
half a dozen sizeable towns in south-western Ontario that all use the  
area code (NANPA NPA) 519.

What happens when a city is assigned a dialling code overlay? 519 is  
overlaid with 226. Which to use?

I realise there's no specific need for the linkage between location  
and number to be accurate (in the sense that nobody is going to be  
unable to call an ambulance simply because a route is tagged  
confusingly) but as a mechanism of convenience it leaves a lot to be  
desired. Linking "location" encoding to the telephone numbering system  
is barely useful today, and will become less and less useful (and more  
and more confusing) as time goes on.

I'll note that ISO 3166-1 numeric already specifies a three-digit  
numerical system for countries ("economies", if you're sensitive to  
Taiwan's status). ISO 3166 is already tied in other contexts to  
Internet registries, and might be a more palatable dependency.

Joe
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

---

From: Roque Gagliano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:24:06 -0300

hi,
When defining the regions for America:
Americas (020) has the following subregions that are encoded:
   - Northern America (021)
   - Caribbean (022)
   - Central America (023)
   - South America (024)
Shouldn-t it be "North America"= Canada + USA.
Roque

On Aug 26, 2008, at 4:56 AM, Matvey Teplov wrote:

> Gentlemen,
> Sincerely Matvey Teplov

---

From: "Matvey Teplov" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 02:30:21 +0100

Hi Roque,

Thanks for reviewing. These are more to encode the regions, not the
countries. Tag that follows this one encodes countries and, in case of North
America, it will look like (I will put private 65000 as AS number that still
have to be defined and you want to encode California, for example):

65000:10021 65000:20001 65000:30006,

where:

65000:10021 - Nothern America
65000:20001 - NAPA
65000:30006 - FIPS code for California

Cheers Matvey

P.S. I think we have to pad all numbers to max 5 digits that we don't have
misreadings in the future.

On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Roque Gagliano <[email-masked]> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> hi,
>> Some time ago there was a discussion over the origination tagging. It took
>> me a while to get through the draft publishing stages, but finally it is in.
>> Can you please review the document and send me your comments. Draft is
>> located at:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkjhK1YACgkQnk+WSgHpbO6UCQCfQVueFCPHcZ3UFiTCIAvI8AiG
> YT8AoMO96LT2HIBXK8JT9nr8ig6upn0M
> =2wcd
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>