Re: [nznog] enum - Top Marks to James!

Justin, I think you raised some very valid points. I also think some other people did as well (Steve for example). However I don't think your points are operational and are more political and business nature, hence not valid for this list. Can you, or anyone suggest a public forum that this sort of debate is valid on? If not, then I suggest we set up a list for some robust debate on the issue. Cheers Don Justin Cook wrote:

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Don Gould mailto:don(a)bowenvale.co.nz> wrote:

So in effect it's an industry foreigner who doesn't speak the language trying to crown himself king of enum.

Justin I find your comments about James rude and uncalled for.

I have talked to James personally on the telephone about this issue and feel he's very open to ideas and his principle motivation seems, to me, to be to get a fire under this issue and push it along.

How dare I question someone's industry credentials after they submit an application to privately dominate a public asset that consisted of one short sentence? His efforts were sub-par and tell you everything you need to know about his viability to be a registrar. I suggest you take Dean's advice and keep it professional rather than vicariously reading insult in metaphor.

I think what you meant to say was "GET the government to run it."

As such, I have called the MED today [1] to identify who is working on this project within MED and express my support for some urgency in pushing the issue along.

The NAD reports, that ComCom wrote, made clear that this issue has been stalled long enough to let number portability be sorted out.

This is an evasive way of saying you think it's free money ripe for the taking. That has clearly failed as a justification in the MED's view. Does anyone here see why James above all other applicants should be the enum registrar? Perhaps more of his peers would consider him if he had worked on an industry presence during his rush to the enum throne.

Humm... so you're saying that if James was to set up a commercial enum registry that funded beer drinking for NZNog members, then you'd be happy with that outcome?

You must be new around here.

You have asserted with a combination of mistruth and spin that we should be giving someone control over something for free, over and above others who have expressed interest in managing that namespace properly. Where are his credentials? Why should James Jones become the enum registrar - apparently in your opinion without challenge. Is there a particular reason you want to shout down dissent?

I hold the opinion if the government isn't going to run E.164, the management of such a service should fall to the largest and most public providers, not the smallest and most private. Why shouldn't a group to manage enum be formed from interested participants from existing NOGs? To me enum is a solution, not a problem waiting to be solved itself. Water runs downhill. Telcos implement services as they need them. The sun sets. enum.org.nz http://enum.org.nz already belongs to an authority who manages namespaces. Et cetera.

I suspect most people on this list can't be bothered commenting because they know the outcome and its inevitability. Enum doesn't need James Jones or his cheer team to be viable. His attempt at rounding up community support has mostly failed. But that's my two NZNOG posts over for another year.