Fwd: [ncc-services-wg] Draft liaison statement on Public ENUM under e164.arpa for the September 2026 ITU-T Study Group 2 meeting
Whoops! You wanted followup on this list and not ncc-services. Oh well... Here it is again.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Subject: [ncc-services-wg] Re: Draft liaison statement on Public ENUM under e164.arpa for the September 2026 ITU-T Study Group 2 meeting Date: 24 August 2026 at 14:36:01 BST To: Hisham Ibrahim <HMI@ripe.net> Cc: ncc-services-wg@ripe.net
On 17 Aug 2026, at 15:48, Hisham Ibrahim <HMI@ripe.net> wrote:
I would appreciate feedback on my draft and I would appreciate it if you could share any comments or concerns, particularly on the technical, procedural or governance aspects, by 25 August, so that the RIPE NCC can incorporate the feedback before finalizing the submission.
Hisham, your proposed document is deeply flawed and unfit for purpose. That means I object to your proposal and obviously do not support it. I could go into this in detail but there's not enough time to do that. A submission to the next Study Group 2 meeting has to be submitted by tomorrow. BTW, that submission must be submitted as a Contribution. It can't be a Liaison Statement. Contact me off-list if you want an explanation.
The Contribution that gets submitted by the NCC must be short and leave no loose ends that would open opportunities for nit-picking, requests for clarification, further unwelcome interference by the ITU and so on. Your suggested text won't do that. The objective must be to kill off C196 and leave no opportunities at ITU for exhuming it. C196 needs two shots to the head, just to be sure. If C196 drags on and on and on, it will be bad for everyone.
Here's the text that should go in this Contribution. I hope it gets community support.
The RIPE NCC regrets to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that Contribution SG2-C-0196 (C196), was ill-prepared and based on misunderstandings. It does not reflect the opinion of the NCC or the RIPE Community. The RIPE NCC sincerely apologises for the confusion which has been caused. C196 should therefore be withdrawn. We respectfully request colleagues pay no further attention to C196 and proceed on the basis it had never been submitted to Study Group 2.
We are happy to confirm there are no technical or procedural changes to the operation of the e164.arpa ENUM registry. RIPE NCC is pleased to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that the current, long-standing agreements around this registry remain in place and are unchanged. It has no plans to alter them. The RIPE NCC will continue to operate this registry in the same neutral, stable and professional manner as it has done since e164.arpa was created. ----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/ncc-services-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
On 24 Aug 2026, at 19:05, Jim Reid wrote:
Here's the text that should go in this Contribution. I hope it gets community support.
The RIPE NCC regrets to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that Contribution SG2-C-0196 (C196), was ill-prepared and based on misunderstandings. It does not reflect the opinion of the NCC or the RIPE Community. The RIPE NCC sincerely apologises for the confusion which has been caused. C196 should therefore be withdrawn. We respectfully request colleagues pay no further attention to C196 and proceed on the basis it had never been submitted to Study Group 2.
We are happy to confirm there are no technical or procedural changes to the operation of the e164.arpa ENUM registry. RIPE NCC is pleased to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that the current, long-standing agreements around this registry remain in place and are unchanged. It has no plans to alter them. The RIPE NCC will continue to operate this registry in the same neutral, stable and professional manner as it has done since e164.arpa was created.
+1 Patrik
On 24 Aug 2026, at 19:05, Jim Reid wrote:
Here's the text that should go in this Contribution. I hope it gets community support.
The RIPE NCC regrets to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that Contribution SG2-C-0196 (C196), was ill-prepared and based on misunderstandings. It does not reflect the opinion of the NCC or the RIPE Community. The RIPE NCC sincerely apologises for the confusion which has been caused. C196 should therefore be withdrawn. We respectfully request colleagues pay no further attention to C196 and proceed on the basis it had never been submitted to Study Group 2.
We are happy to confirm there are no technical or procedural changes to the operation of the e164.arpa ENUM registry. RIPE NCC is pleased to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that the current, long-standing agreements around this registry remain in place and are unchanged. It has no plans to alter them. The RIPE NCC will continue to operate this registry in the same neutral, stable and professional manner as it has done since e164.arpa was created.
Looks good to me. Niall
On 24 Aug 2026, at 19:05, Jim Reid wrote:
Here's the text that should go in this Contribution. I hope it gets community support. ... ... ...
niall.oreilly@ucd.ie 2026-08-24 21:10 [+0100]:
Looks good to me.
I support it too. Cheers, /Liman
I support it too Salam On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 at 08:15, Lars-Johan Liman <liman@netnod.se> wrote:
On 24 Aug 2026, at 19:05, Jim Reid wrote:
Here's the text that should go in this Contribution. I hope it gets community support. ... ... ...
niall.oreilly@ucd.ie 2026-08-24 21:10 [+0100]:
Looks good to me.
I support it too.
Cheers, /Liman ----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/cooperation-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 08:14:56AM +0200, Lars-Johan Liman wrote:
On 24 Aug 2026, at 19:05, Jim Reid wrote:
Here's the text that should go in this Contribution. I hope it gets community support. ... ... ...
niall.oreilly@ucd.ie 2026-08-24 21:10 [+0100]:
Looks good to me.
I support it too.
as someone who has spoken on the topic before, I support this way forward. FWIW, the SG2 Contribution deadline is listed as 27 August 2026. Best Peter
Jim, This looks good to me.
Here's the text that should go in this Contribution. I hope it gets community support.
The RIPE NCC regrets to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that Contribution SG2-C-0196 (C196), was ill-prepared and based on misunderstandings. It does not reflect the opinion of the NCC or the RIPE Community. The RIPE NCC sincerely apologises for the confusion which has been caused. C196 should therefore be withdrawn. We respectfully request colleagues pay no further attention to C196 and proceed on the basis it had never been submitted to Study Group 2.
We are happy to confirm there are no technical or procedural changes to the operation of the e164.arpa ENUM registry. RIPE NCC is pleased to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that the current, long-standing agreements around this registry remain in place and are unchanged. It has no plans to alter them. The RIPE NCC will continue to operate this registry in the same neutral, stable and professional manner as it has done since e164.arpa was created.
Best, Sergey
All, I have followed the discussion in the working group and want to thank Jim for setting us straight and for providing the text for the contribution from the RIPE NCC and the RIPE community. I see a clear consensus among the participants in this discussion for Jim's proposal. After internal discussions, discussions with the RIPE NCC Executive Board, and a meeting with the chairs of ITU Study Group 2 yesterday, the RIPE NCC will submit the proposed text as the RIPE NCC contribution to ITU Study Group 2 today for their upcoming September meeting. Going forward, the lead for maintaining the ENUM registry is our Chief Registry Officer, Gabor de Wit. We will, as always, work to improve the execution of our registry processes to ensure an accurate registry in cooperation with the relevant stakeholders. I trust this will satisfy the community and set a clear path forward. Sincerely, Hans Petter Holen Chief Executive Officer RIPE NCC Phone: +31 20 535 4444 RIPE NCC , P.O. Box 10096, 1001EB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands // Stationsplein 11, 1012 AB Amsterdam
Dear Hans, colleagues, Thank you for confirming the community's position and engaging with SG2 to provide some clarity to this matter. As probably not everybody has an ITU account, could you be so kind to publish a copy of the contribution on the RIPE NCC website (of course blocking the personal information). Also, as you indicated you talked to the SG2 chair, did she by any chance reveal the results of the member state consultation that was triggered by the previous contribution? Having an overview of what the various member states views are might also provide the RIPE community with information to feed into any subsequent discussions concerning the future of ENUM. In that sense, ITU's efforts might be of some value after all. Kind regards, Marco Hogewoning From: Hans Petter Holen <hph@ripe.net> Date: Thursday, 27 August 2026 at 11:23 To: RIPE NCC Cooperation Working Group <cooperation-wg@ripe.net> Cc: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>; Gabor de Wit <gdewit@ripe.net> Subject: [cooperation-wg] Re: Liaison statement on Public ENUM under e164.arpa for the September 2026 ITU-T Study Group 2 meeting U ontvangt niet vaak e-mail van hph@ripe.net. Ontdek waarom dit belangrijk is<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> All, I have followed the discussion in the working group and want to thank Jim for setting us straight and for providing the text for the contribution from the RIPE NCC and the RIPE community. I see a clear consensus among the participants in this discussion for Jim's proposal. After internal discussions, discussions with the RIPE NCC Executive Board, and a meeting with the chairs of ITU Study Group 2 yesterday, the RIPE NCC will submit the proposed text as the RIPE NCC contribution to ITU Study Group 2 today for their upcoming September meeting. Going forward, the lead for maintaining the ENUM registry is our Chief Registry Officer, Gabor de Wit. We will, as always, work to improve the execution of our registry processes to ensure an accurate registry in cooperation with the relevant stakeholders. I trust this will satisfy the community and set a clear path forward. Sincerely, Hans Petter Holen Chief Executive Officer RIPE NCC Phone: +31 20 535 4444 RIPE NCC , P.O. Box 10096, 1001EB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands // Stationsplein 11, 1012 AB Amsterdam Dit bericht kan informatie bevatten die niet voor u is bestemd. Indien u niet de geadresseerde bent of dit bericht abusievelijk aan u is gezonden, wordt u verzocht dat aan de afzender te melden en het bericht te verwijderen. De Staat aanvaardt geen aansprakelijkheid voor schade, van welke aard ook, die verband houdt met risico's verbonden aan het elektronisch verzenden van berichten. This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. The State accepts no liability for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent in the electronic transmission of messages.
On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 at 13:30, Hogewoning, M.C. (Marco) < m.c.hogewoning@minezk.nl> wrote:
Dear Hans, colleagues,
Thank you for confirming the community's position and engaging with SG2 to provide some clarity to this matter.
As probably not everybody has an ITU account, could you be so kind to publish a copy of the contribution on the RIPE NCC website (of course blocking the personal information).
It has now been published on https://www.ripe.net/community/internet-governance/multi-stakeholder-engagem... under ITU contributions https://www.ripe.net/media/documents/Public_ENUM_under_e164.arpa_-_RIPE_NCC_...
Also, as you indicated you talked to the SG2 chair, did she by any chance reveal the results of the member state consultation that was triggered by the previous contribution? Having an overview of what the various member states views are might also provide the RIPE community with information to feed into any subsequent discussions concerning the future of ENUM. In that sense, ITU's efforts might be of some value after all.
While I saw a preliminary summary of the feedback, I do not have a copy that can be shared. There were several countries arguing for continuing the service. We will see what details can be shared after the Study Group meeting. Sincerely, Hans Petter Holen Chief Executive Officer RIPE NCC Phone: +31 20 535 4444 RIPE NCC , P.O. Box 10096, 1001EB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands // Stationsplein 11, 1012 AB Amsterdam
Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> writes: Here's the text that should go in this Contribution. I hope it gets community support. The RIPE NCC regrets to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that Contribution SG2-C-0196 (C196), was ill-prepared and based on misunderstandings. It does not reflect the opinion of the NCC or the RIPE Community. The RIPE NCC sincerely apologises for the confusion which has been caused. C196 should therefore be withdrawn. We respectfully request colleagues pay no further attention to C196 and proceed on the basis it had never been submitted to Study Group 2. We are happy to confirm there are no technical or procedural changes to the operation of the e164.arpa ENUM registry. RIPE NCC is pleased to inform Study Group 2 and the TSB that the current, long-standing agreements around this registry remain in place and are unchanged. It has no plans to alter them. The RIPE NCC will continue to operate this registry in the same neutral, stable and professional manner as it has done since e164.arpa was created. agree +1 Jim thank you for picking this up -- Christian de Larrinaga
participants (10)
-
Christian de Larrinaga -
Hans Petter Holen -
Hogewoning, M.C. (Marco) -
Jim Reid -
Lars-Johan Liman -
Niall O'Reilly -
Patrik Fältström -
Peter Koch -
Salam Yamout -
Sergey Myasoedov