[Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]

Wed Sep 13 15:56:30 UTC 2006

On Sep 13, 2006, at 8:43 AM, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:

>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 05:37:05 -0700
> David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
>> I'm sure the same argument was used for telephone numbers when
>> technical folk were arguing against number portability.
>
> Oh come on.  You know perfectly well that phone numbers are not the
> same as IP.  No one knows me by my IP address.  They know me by my
> email address(es).  Heck, even I don't know my own IP address without
> running ifconfig and I installed it and maintain the system.
>
> If we were still calling central and asking "Hi Mabel, can you put me
> through to Doc," no one would give a rat's ass about phone number
> portability.  Notice that no one is getting worked up about circuit
> number portability.
>
In point of fact, phone numbers as David is describing them are much
more of a parallel to DNS than to IP.  BTNs (Billing Telephone Numbers)
which are not portable are like IP addresses.

The way the telephone system works is when you dial a number, it is
looked up in the SS7 database and mapped to a BTN. The call is then
routed based on that BTN to its destination, with the dialed number in
the DNIS field and the BTN in the destination field.

Much like an HTTP request to a virtual server.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20060913/aafedcc7/attachment.sig>