Skip to main content

IAB replyto ENUM liaison statement, May 2002

Document Type IAB Statement
Title IAB replyto ENUM liaison statement, May 2002
Published 2002-05-03
Metadata last updated 2023-08-09
State Active
Send notices to (None)

IAB reply to ENUM liaison statement

3 May 2002

Richard Hill

Counsellor, SG2

International Telecommunication Union

Place des Nations

CH-1211 Geneva 20



The IAB has reviewed the material you forwarded in your liaison statement posted at

With respect to the questions pertaining to creating a legal instrument — we would like to better understand the problem that TSB wishes to solve, before discussing the particulars of the legal instruments. The specific conditions described express expectations of service levels, but pertain to the relationship between the IAB and the selected organization to which has been delegated for operation. This seems unclear.

With respect to the marked up RIPE-NCC instructions from the IAB to RIPE-NCC:

  • 1.4.2: No changes will be made by the IAB regarding what happens if TSB does not contact RIPE NCC. I.e. it is implicit in the instructions that RIPE NCC will act according to their normal routine, and that is to apply their best effort to implement the desired outcome.
  • 1.4.3: The IAB has no problems with adding this bullet (although the IAB thinks it is included in point 2.3).
  • 1.7: The IAB thinks that the form of communication between RIPE NCC and TSB is a simple matter to arrange, and does not need to be stated in the document. Also, it may need to change over time. The IAB does not think it is necessary to add this.
  • 1.8: Like 1.7, up to RIPE NCC and TSB. i.e. TSB informs RIPE NCC as to what the contact points are, and how to communicate. The IAB expects RIPE to be able to communicate with these contact points. If any trouble arises, the matter can be referred to the IAB.
  • 2.2: The IAB has no problem adding the suggested text in the beginning of point 2.2.
  • 2.6: The IAB agrees the editorial changes are ok.
  • 2.7: The IAB has no problem including this point.

Your liaison statement of February 21, 2002 notes that the questions were subject to the approval of the SG2 meeting in May 2002. The above is the requested official reply to your request for input. We look forward to hearing any changesthat may arise from the SG2 meeting.

Best regards,

Leslie Daigle

On behalf of the IAB.