e164.org - no verification call on +49 1801 555777xxxx

Moonbase schrieb:

Hm. Some 27, I guess (without checking, and not all ENUM registered). Plus another 9999 or so whenever my Asterisk is set up *biggrin* (VoIP only, and mainly for testing and demo purposes).

Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

Email me (support @ e164) with your username please.

Moonbase only has 16 digits to worry about.

I have a friend with a sipgate.de number which is +4918016338460xxxx -- he said ok to publish whole number -- and that's 17 digits. He has no particular need for extreme measures to get this into enum, but it is a bit annoying that e164.org insists on rejecting it.

In general, systems should be standard compliant with what they "send out", that is, with what they create, but should be permissive with what they accept as input. "Strict in what you send, tolerant in what you receive." So sipgate.de really shouldn't be creating these absurdly long numbers that don't comply with the ISO E.164 standard, but e164.org should really be permissive with respect to accepting it.

It occurs to me, that in the specific case of sipgate, enum.org could simply get a completly free sipgate account which could be used to attempt to verify sipgate numbers completely for free. Now how you would determine that the number is a sipgate number and allow it to be overlong must remain an exercise for e164.org to figure out. I doubt you want to have a "provider" field during the registration process, but maybe you need to in the special case of long 01801 numbers in Germany.

/john

Edit Ghostwalker: Replaced last four digits by x - you don't want Spit either, do you?

jcovert schrieb:

I have a friend with a sipgate.de number which is +4918016338460xxxx -- he said ok to publish whole number -- and that's 17 digits. He has no particular need for extreme measures to get this into enum, but it is a bit annoying that e164.org insists on rejecting it.

Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

We implemented checked because we were getting complaints about not getting calls, the introduction of number checking was brought about by people trying to add numbers that can't be called internationally, although Moonbase was the first person to try and add seemingly legitimate number we couldn't call.

It occurs to me, that in the specific case of sipgate, enum.org could simply get a completly free sipgate account which could be used to attempt to verify sipgate numbers completely for free. Now how you would determine that the number is a sipgate number and allow it to be overlong must remain an exercise for e164.org to figure out. I doubt you want to have a "provider" field during the registration process, but maybe you need to in the special case of long 01801 numbers in Germany.

Zum Vergrößern anklicken....

It would be easy enough to figure out, ask the user (like we do with e164.arpa), however how many providers are likely to issue long numbers with different providers and can we get free accounts with those as well?