Discussion List for Freenum/ITAD Subscriber Number (ISN) Project

[John Todd <>]

On Oct 29, 2009, at 4:09 PM, Peter Grace wrote:

> John R Covert wrote:
> > If an ITAD is an organizational number, then at least "0*ITAD"
> > should be expected, and at least following the Continental
> > model for countries with variable length numbers, "0*ITAD"
> > is the recommended "main number".
>
> This is what I heard when I originally setup ISN back in the  
> beginning.
> I'm fine with changing 0*739 if that's considered bad practice for  
> ISN?
>
> I don't know if any single body in ISN is considered the "Linus" of  
> the
> project at this point, I'd assume we'd consider John Todd to be that  
> guy...
>
> John, would you consider 0*ITAD "SHOULD NOT" or "MUST NOT"?
>
> -pete


I'd say currently "SHOULD NOT" but ISN isn't an RFC proposal yet, and  
I can be convinced otherwise if there is further evidence that it  
should be allowed.  I can completely understand the desire to have "0"  
as the main number of an organization, though maybe it shouldn't be  
the "main number", but should be "human operator".  This still makes  
for very difficult dialplan interpretation for those who are not using  
a fully SIP-compliant system (a "dial-as-you-go" interface like an  
older ESS, which still runs the majority of the phones in the world.)

Well-known services are an interesting question with SIP in general.   
There has been no mention to my knowledge of such a thing, because of  
course the variety of language choices preclude any one set of strings  
being understandable in all (or even a majority) of languages.  But  
the conversion to numeric form of arbitrary digit length may make this  
a good time to bring it up.  Single digits seem like an obvious place  
to start for WKS.  Does anyone thing that there should be WKS for  
ISN?  Or will too many companies want to use single-digits for their  
own custom services that an overlap would be too common to warrant  
creation of WKS lists?

JT