Email Portability Approved by Knesset Committee
smb at cs.columbia.edu
Tue Feb 23 06:25:42 UTC 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
>> 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