[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits] [IPR]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 RFC 4355

ENUM                                                         R. Brandner
Internet-Draft                                                Siemens AG
Expires: November 10, 2005                                     L. Conroy
                                             Siemens Roke Manor Research
                                                              R. Stastny
                                                                   Oefeg
                                                             May 9, 2005


    IANA Registration for Enumservices email, fax, mms, ems and sms
                      <draft-ietf-enum-msg-05.txt>

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on November 10, 2005.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).

Abstract

   This document registers the Enumservices "email", "fax", "sms", "ems"
   and "mms" using the URI schemes 'tel:' and 'mailto:' as per the IANA
   registration process defined in the ENUM specification RFC3761.





Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005               [Page 1]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


Table of Contents

   1.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Email Service Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   4.  Fax Service Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   5.  MMS, EMS, SMS Service  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.1   Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     5.2   SMS Service Registrations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       5.2.1   SMS Service Registration with tel: URI . . . . . . . .  8
       5.2.2   SMS Service Registration with mailto: URI  . . . . . .  9
     5.3   EMS Service Registrations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       5.3.1   EMS Service Registration with tel: URI . . . . . . . . 10
       5.3.2   EMS Service Registration with mailto: URI  . . . . . . 11
     5.4   MMS Service Registrations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       5.4.1   MMS Service Registration with tel: URI . . . . . . . . 11
       5.4.2   MMS Service Registration with mailto: URI  . . . . . . 12
   6.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   7.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
   8.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     8.1   Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     8.2   Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
       Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
       Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 21



























Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005               [Page 2]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


1.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC2119 [1].














































Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005               [Page 3]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


2.  Introduction

   ENUM (E.164 Number Mapping, RFC3761 [2]) is a system that transforms
   E.164 numbers [3] into domain names and then uses DNS (Domain Name
   Service, RFC1034 [4]) services like delegation through NS records and
   NAPTR records to look up what services are available for a specific
   domain name.

   This document registers Enumservices according to the guidelines
   given in RFC3761 to be used for provisioning in the services field of
   a NAPTR [5] resource record to indicate what class of functionality a
   given end point offers.  The registration is defined within the DDDS
   (Dynamic Delegation Discovery System [6][7] [5][8] [9]) hierarchy,
   for use with the "E2U" DDDS Application defined in RFC3761.

   The following Enumservices are registered with this document:
   "email", "fax", "sms", "ems" and "mms".  These share a common feature
   in that they each indicate that the functionality of the given end
   points and the associated resources are capable of receiving discrete
   messages, albeit of different types.

   According to RFC3761, the Enumservice registered must be able to
   function as a selection mechanism when choosing one NAPTR resource
   record from another.  That means that the registration MUST specify
   what is expected when using that very NAPTR record, and the URI
   scheme which is the outcome of the use of it.

   Therefore an Enumservice acts as a hint, indicating the kind of
   service with which the URI constructed using the regexp field is
   associated.  There can be more than one Enumservice included within a
   single NAPTR; this indicates that there is more than one service that
   can be achieved using the associated URI scheme.

   The common thread with this set of definitions is that they reflect
   the kind of service that the end user will hope to achieve with the
   communication using the associated URI.

   The services specified here are intended not to specify the protocol
   or even method of connection that must be used to achieve each
   service.  Instead they define the kind of interactive behaviour that
   an end user will expect, leaving the end system to decide (based on
   policies outside the remit of this specification) how to execute the
   service.

   Since the same URI scheme may be used for different services (e.g.
   'tel:'), and the same kind of service may use different URI schemes
   (e.g. for VoIP 'h323:' and 'tel:' may be used), it is necessary in
   some cases to specify the service and the URI scheme used.



Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005               [Page 4]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


   The service parameters defined in RFC3761 allow therefore a "type"
   and a "subtype" to be specified.  Within this set of specifications
   the convention is assumed that the "type" (being the more generic
   term) defines the service and the "subtype" defines the URI scheme.

   Even where currently only one URI scheme is associated with a given
   service, it should be considered that an additional URI scheme to be
   used with this service may be added later.  Thus the subtype is
   needed to identify the specific Enumservice intended.

   In this document, there are two URI schemes that are used within the
   various services.  These are 'tel:', as specified in RFC3966 [10] and
   'mailto:', as specified in RFC2368 [11].






































Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005               [Page 5]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


3.  Email Service Registration

   Enumservice Name: "email"

   Enumservice Type: "email"

   Enumservice Subtype: "mailto"

   URI Scheme: 'mailto:'

   Functional Specification:

      This Enumservice indicates that the remote resource can be
      addressed by the associated URI scheme in order to send an email.

   Security Considerations:

      See Section 6.

   Intended Usage: COMMON

   Authors:

      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author
      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)

   Any other information the author deems interesting:

      None






















Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005               [Page 6]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


4.  Fax Service Registration

   Enumservice Name: "fax"

   Enumservice Type: "fax"

   Enumservice Subtype: "tel"

   URI Scheme: 'tel:'

   Functional Specification:

      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the
      associated URI scheme is capable of being contacted to provide a
      communication session during which facsimile documents can be
      sent.

      A client selecting this NAPTR will have support for generating and
      sending facsimile documents to the recipient using the PSTN
      session and transfer protocols specified in [12] and [13] - in
      short, they will have a fax program with a local or shared PSTN
      access over which they can send faxes.

   Security Considerations:

      See Section 6.

   Intended Usage: COMMON

   Authors:

      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author
      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)

   Any other information the author deems interesting:

      None














Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005               [Page 7]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


5.  MMS, EMS, SMS Service

5.1  Introduction

   An ENUM NAPTR indicates ability on the part of the Subscriber to
   receive specified communication service (or services) provided via
   the contact address (shown in the generated URI).

   In the case of MMS, EMS, and SMS services, the capability of these
   services is a nested superset; thus a service supporting MMS can
   support also delivery of EMS or SMS message content to a recipient
   that is receiving a Multimedia Message, whilst a service supporting
   EMS can also deliver SMS message content to a recipient that can
   accept receipt of EMS Messages.

   Thus, even if a client wants only to generate and send content that
   could be carried in an SMS message, they MAY choose to consider also
   NAPTRs holding EMS and/or MMS Enumservices, as these indicate that
   the destination can accept EMS and/or MMS messages; these services
   will be able to deliver SMS content to the recipient address.

   Conversely, a client capable of sending MMS messages may choose to
   consider also NAPTRs indicating support for EMS or SMS messages,
   (assuming that the network to which it is connected provides these
   services as well, or is capable of providing a gateway to systems
   that do provide these services).  In taking this choice, it would
   have to "downgrade" its User Interface to allow only generation of
   content that conforms to SMS or EMS standards.

   These behaviours on the part of the client are purely optional, and
   are NOT the subject of any protocol standardisation.

5.2  SMS Service Registrations

5.2.1  SMS Service Registration with tel: URI

   Enumservice Name: "sms"

   Enumservice Type: "sms"

   Enumservice Subtypes: "tel"

   URI Scheme: 'tel:'

   Functional Specification:






Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005               [Page 8]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the
      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using the
      Short Message Service (SMS) [14].

   Security Considerations:

      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.
      However, the general considerations of Section 6 apply.

   Intended Usage: COMMON

   Authors:

      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author
      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)

   Any other information the author deems interesting:

      None


5.2.2  SMS Service Registration with mailto: URI

   Enumservice Name: "sms"

   Enumservice Type: "sms"

   Enumservice Subtypes: "mailto"

   URI Scheme: 'mailto:'

   Functional Specification:

      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the
      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using an
      email protocol.

      SMS content is sent over SMTP using the format specified by TS
      23.140 [15] section 8.4.4 and TS 26.140 [16] section 4, as an MMS
      message.  Within such a message, SMS content is carried as either
      a text or application/octet-stream MIME sub-part (see TS 26.140
      [16] , section 4.1).

   Security Considerations:

      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.
      However, the general considerations of Section 6 apply.




Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005               [Page 9]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


   Intended Usage: COMMON

   Authors:

      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author
      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)

   Any other information the author deems interesting:

      None


5.3  EMS Service Registrations

5.3.1  EMS Service Registration with tel: URI

   Enumservice Name: "ems"

   Enumservice Type: "ems"

   Enumservice Subtype: "tel"

   URI Scheme: 'tel:'

   Functional Specification:

      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the
      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using the
      Enhanced Message Service (EMS) [14].

   Security Considerations:

      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.
      However, the general considerations of Section 6 apply.

   Intended Usage: COMMON

   Authors:

      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author
      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)

   Any other information the author deems interesting:

      Note that an indication of EMS can be taken as implying that the
      recipient is capable of receiving SMS messages at this address as
      well.




Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 10]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


5.3.2  EMS Service Registration with mailto: URI

   Enumservice Name: "ems"

   Enumservice Type: "ems"

   Enumservice Subtypes: "mailto"

   URI Scheme: 'mailto:'

   Functional Specification:

      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the
      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using an
      email protocol.

      EMS content is sent over SMTP using the format specified by TS
      23.140 [15] section 8.4.4 and TS 26.140 [16] section 4, as an MMS
      message.  Within such a message, EMS content is carried as either
      a text or application/octet-stream MIME sub-part (see TS 26.140
      [16] , section 4.1).

   Security Considerations:

      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.
      However, the general considerations of Section 6 apply.

   Intended Usage: COMMON

   Authors:

      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author
      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)

   Any other information the author deems interesting:

      None


5.4  MMS Service Registrations

5.4.1  MMS Service Registration with tel: URI

   Enumservice Name: "mms"

   Enumservice Type: "mms"

   Enumservice Subtype: "tel"



Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 11]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


   URI Scheme: 'tel:'

   Functional Specification:

      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the
      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using the
      Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) [15].

   Security Considerations:

      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.
      However, the general considerations of Section 6 apply.

   Intended Usage: COMMON

   Authors:

      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author
      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)

   Any other information the author deems interesting:

      Note that MMS can be used as an alternative to deliver an SMS RP-
      DATA RPDU if, for example, the SMS bearer is not supported.  If an
      entry includes this Enumservice, then in effect this can be taken
      as implying that the recipient is capable of receiving EMS or SMS
      messages at this address.  Such choices on the end system design
      do have two small caveats; whilst in practice all terminals
      supporting MMS today support SMS as well, it might not necessarily
      be the case in the future, and there may be tariff differences in
      using the MMS rather than using the SMS or EMS.


5.4.2  MMS Service Registration with mailto: URI

   Enumservice Name: "mms"

   Enumservice Type: "mms"

   Enumservice Subtypes: "mailto"

   URI Scheme: 'mailto:'

   Functional Specification:

      This Enumservice indicates that the resource identified by the
      associated URI scheme is capable of receiving a message using an
      email protocol.



Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 12]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


      MMS messages are sent over SMTP using the format specified by TS
      23.140 [15] section 8.4.4 and TS 26.140 [16] section 4.

      Within and between MMS Environments (MMSE, network infrastructures
      that support the MultiMedia Service), other pieces of state data
      (for example, charging-significant information) are exchanged
      between MMS Relay Servers.  Thus, although these servers use SMTP
      as the "bearer" for their application exchanges, they map their
      internal state to specialised headers carried in the SMTP message
      exchanges.  The headers used in such MMSE are described in detail
      in [17].

   Security Considerations:

      There are no specific security issues with this Enumservice.
      However, the general considerations of Section 6 apply.

   Intended Usage: COMMON

   Authors:

      Rudolf Brandner, Lawrence Conroy, Richard Stastny (for author
      contact detail see Authors' Addresses section)

   Any other information the author deems interesting:

      The MMS Architecture describes an interface between the MMSE and
      "legacy messaging systems" (labelled as MM3) which accepts
      "standard" SMTP messages.  Thus although the  MMS Relay Server
      that supports this interface appears as a standard SMTP server
      from the perspective of an Internet-based mail server, it acts as
      a gateway and translator, adding the internal state data that is
      used within and between the MMS  Environments.  This mechanism is
      described in [17], which also includes references to the
      specifications agreed by those bodies responsible for the design
      of the MMS.















Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 13]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


6.  Security Considerations

   DNS, as used by ENUM, is a global, distributed database.  Thus any
   information stored there is visible to anyone anonymously.  Whilst
   this is not qualitatively different from publication in a Telephone
   Directory, it does open the data subject to having "their"
   information collected automatically without any indication that this
   has been done or by whom.

   Such data harvesting by third parties is often used to generate lists
   of targets for unrequested information; in short, they are used to
   address "spam".  Anyone who uses a Web-archived mailing list is aware
   that the volume of "spam" email they are sent increases when they
   post to the mailing list; publication of a telephone number in ENUM
   is no different, and may be used to send "junk faxes" or "junk SMS"
   for example.

   Many mailing list users have more than one email address and use
   "sacrificial" email accounts when posting to such lists to help
   filter out unrequested emails sent to them.  This is not so easy with
   published telephone numbers; the PSTN E.164 number assignment process
   is much more involved and usually a single E.164 number (or a fixed
   range of numbers) is associated with each PSTN access.  Thus
   providing a "sacrificial" phone number in any publication is not
   possible.

   Due to the implications of publishing data on a globally accessible
   database, as a principle the data subject MUST give their explicit
   informed consent to data being published in ENUM.

   In addition, they should be made aware that, due to storage of such
   data during harvesting by third parties, removal of the data from
   publication will not remove any copies that have been taken; in
   effect, any publication may be permanent.

   However, regulations in many regions will require that the data
   subject can at any time request that the data is removed from
   publication, and that their consent for its publication is explicitly
   confirmed at regular intervals.

   When placing a fax call via the PSTN or a sending a message via the
   Public Land Mobile Network, the sender may be charged for this
   action.  In both kinds of network, calling or messaging to some
   numbers is more expensive than sending to others; both networks have
   "premium rate" services that can charge considerably more than a
   "normal" call or message destination.  As such, it is important that
   the end user be asked to confirm sending the message, and that the
   destination number be presented to them.  It is the originating



Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 14]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


   user's choice on whether or not to send a message to this destination
   number, but they SHOULD be shown the destination number so that they
   can make this decision.

   Although a fax number, like other E.164 numbers, doesn't appear to
   reveal as much identity information about a user as a name in the
   format user@host (e.g. an email or sip address), the information is
   still publicly available, thus there is still the risk of unwanted
   communication.

   An analysis of threats specific to the dependence of ENUM on the DNS,
   and the applicability of DNSSEC [18] to these, is provided in RFC3761
   [2].  A thorough analysis of threats to the DNS itself is covered in
   RFC3833 [19].

   An email address is a canonical address by which a user is known.
   Placing this address in ENUM is comparable to placing a SIP or H.323
   address in the DNS.

   DNS does not make any policy decisions about the records that it
   shares with an inquirer.  All DNS records must be assumed to be
   available to all inquirers at all times.  The information provided
   within an ENUM NAPTR resource record must therefore be considered to
   be open to the public, which is a cause for some privacy
   considerations.

   Therefore ENUM Subscribers should be made aware of this risk.  Since
   it is within the responsibility of the ENUM Subscriber which data is
   entered in ENUM, it is within the ENUM Subscribers control if he
   enters email addresses:

   1.  allowing inference of private data e.g. his first and last name

   2.  at all

   It should also be considered that it is the purpose of public
   communication identifiers to be publicly known.  To reduce spam and
   other unwanted communication other means should be made available,
   such as incoming message filtering.

   Some Value Added Service Providers use receipt of a short message to
   a given special service telephone number as a trigger to start
   delivery of data messages to the calling number.  By sending an SMS
   (or, in principle, an EMS or MMS) to one of these special service
   numbers, one is entering into a contract to pay for receipt of a set
   of messages containing information (e.g. news, sports results, "Ring
   Tones").




Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 15]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


   Thus it is very important that the end terminal presents the
   destination number to which any message is to be sent using the "sms:
   tel", "ems:tel" or "mms:tel" Enumservices, to allow the end user to
   cancel any message before it is sent to one of these numbers.

   At present these systems use the circuit switched network trusted
   calling line identifier to identify the destination for the
   subsequent charged information messages, and so it is believed that
   sending using the "sms:mailto", "ems:mailto" or "mms:mailto"
   Enumservices does not have this risk currently.









































Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 16]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


7.  Acknowledgements

   Many thanks to Ville Warsta for his close reading of the draft and
   extracting the right references.  Thanks also to those who are
   involved in the parallel effort to specify the requirements for "real
   world" ENUM trials resulting in TS 102 172 [20], in which this and
   other Enumservices are referenced.












































Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 17]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


8.  References

8.1  Normative References

   [1]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
         Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997.

   [2]   Faltstrom, P. and M. Mealling, "The E.164 to Uniform Resource
         Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation  Discovery System (DDDS)
         Application (ENUM)", RFC 3761, April 2004.

   [3]   ITU-T, "The International Public Telecommunication Number
         Plan", Recommendation E.164, May 1997.

   [4]   Mockapetris, P., "DOMAIN NAMES - CONCEPTS AND FACILITIES",
         RFC 1034, November 1987.

   [5]   Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)  Part
         Three: The Domain Name System (DNS) Database", RFC 3403,
         October 2002.

   [6]   Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)  Part
         One: The Comprehensive DDDS", RFC 3401, October 2002.

   [7]   Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)  Part
         Two: The Algorithm", RFC 3402, October 2002.

   [8]   Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)  Part
         Four: The Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI)", RFC 3404,
         October 2002.

   [9]   Mealling, M., "Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS)  Part
         Five: URI.ARPA Assignment Procedures", RFC 3405, October 2002.

   [10]  Schulzrinne, H., "The tel URI for Telephone Numbers", RFC 3966,
         December 2004.

   [11]  Hoffman, P., Masinter, L., and J. Zawinski, "The mailto URL
         scheme", RFC 2368, July 1998.

   [12]  ITU-T, "Standardization of Group 3 facsimile terminals for
         document transmission", Recommendation T.4, April 1999.

   [13]  ITU-T, "Procedures for document facsimile transmission in the
         general switched telephone network", Recommendation T.30,
         April 1999.

   [14]  3GPP, "Technical realization of the Short Message Service



Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 18]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


         (SMS);  (Release5)", 3GPP TS 23.040.

   [15]  3GPP, "Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS); Functional
         description; Stage 2 (Release 5)", 3GPP TS 23.140.

   [16]  3GPP, "Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS); Media formats and
         codecs; (Release 5)", 3GPP TS 26.140.

   [17]  Gellens, R., "Mapping Between the Multimedia Messaging Service
         (MMS) and Internet Mail", draft-ietf-lemonade-mms-mapping-03
         (Work in Progress), April 2005.

8.2  Informative References

   [18]  Arends, R. and et al. , "Protocol Modifications for the DNS
         Security Extensions", RFC 4035, March 2005.

   [19]  Atkins, D. and R. Austein, "Threat Analysis of the Domain Name
         System (DNS)", RFC 3833, August 2004.

   [20]  ETSI, "Minimum Requirements for Interoperability of ENUM
         Implementations", ETSI TS 102 172, January 2005.

   [21]  Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3",
         RFC 2026, BCP 9, October 1996.

   [22]  Bradner, S., "IETF Rights in Contributions", BCP 78, RFC 3978,
         March 2005.

   [23]  Bradner, S., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology",
         BCP 79, RFC 3979, March 2005.


Authors' Addresses

   Rudolf Brandner
   Siemens AG
   Hofmannstr. 51
   81359 Munich
   Germany

   Phone: +49-89-722-51003
   Email: rudolf.brandner@siemens.com








Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 19]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


   Lawrence Conroy
   Siemens Roke Manor Research
   Roke Manor
   Romsey
   United Kingdom

   Phone: +44-1794-833666
   Email: lwc@roke.co.uk


   Richard Stastny
   Oefeg
   Postbox 147
   1103 Vienna
   Austria

   Phone: +43-664-420-4100
   Email: Richard.stastny@oefeg.at

































Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 20]

Internet-Draft     IANA Msg Enumservice Registrations           May 2005


Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.


Disclaimer of Validity

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.




Brandner, et al.        Expires November 10, 2005              [Page 21]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.108, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/