Email Portability Approved by Knesset Committee

Steven Bellovin smb at cs.columbia.edu
Tue Feb 23 00:25:42 CST 2010


On Feb 23, 2010, at 1:06 AM, gordon b slater wrote:

> 
> On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 21:20 -0800, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>> In general, a core problem with the Knesset law is that it presumes
>> something 
>> that is viable for the phone infrastructure is equally - or at least
>> tolerably - 
>> viable in the email infrastructure.  Unfortunately, the details of the
>> two are 
>> massively different in terms of architecture, service model, cost
>> structures and 
>> operational skills.
> 
> Good point Dave; for the mobile phone industry, number portability is an
> endpoint thing - no harder to change than a field in a
> billing/accounting database (the SIM#, keeping it very simple here), for
> email its a WHOLE lot more. 
> 

And who runs this database?

Local number portability requires a new database, one that didn't exist before,  It's run by a neutral party and maps any phone number to a carrier and endpoint identifier.  (In the US, that database is currently run by Neustar -- see http://www.neustar.biz/solutions/solutions-for/number-administration)

Figuring out how such a solution would work with email is left as an exercise for the reader.

		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb









More information about the NANOG mailing list