1、 ETSI EG 202 236 V1.1.1 (2003-10)ETSI Guide Telecommunications and Internet ProtocolHarmonization Over Networks (TIPHON);Design guide;Use of non-numeric namesETSI ETSI EG 202 236 V1.1.1 (2003-10) 2 Reference DEG/TIPHON-04009 Keywords internet, name, network, protocol ETSI 650 Route des Lucioles F-06
2、921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00 Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16 Siret N 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C Association but non lucratif enregistre la Sous-Prfecture de Grasse (06) N 7803/88 Important notice Individual copies of the present document can be downloaded from: http:/www.ets
3、i.org The present document may be made available in more than one electronic version or in print. In any case of existing or perceived difference in contents between such versions, the reference version is the Portable Document Format (PDF). In case of dispute, the reference shall be the printing on
4、 ETSI printers of the PDF version kept on a specific network drive within ETSI Secretariat. Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status. Information on the current status of this and other ETSI documents is available at http:/portal.
5、etsi.org/tb/status/status.asp If you find errors in the present document, send your comment to: editoretsi.org Copyright Notification No part may be reproduced except as authorized by written permission. The copyright and the foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media. European Teleco
6、mmunications Standards Institute 2003. All rights reserved. DECTTM, PLUGTESTSTM and UMTSTM are Trade Marks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members. TIPHONTMand the TIPHON logo are Trade Marks currently being registered by ETSI for the benefit of its Members. 3GPPTM is a Trade Mark of ETSI
7、registered for the benefit of its Members and of the 3GPP Organizational Partners. ETSI ETSI EG 202 236 V1.1.1 (2003-10) 3 Contents Intellectual Property Rights4 Foreword.4 1 Scope 5 2 References 5 3 Abbreviations .6 4 User aspects6 5 Available schemes8 5.1 Internet naming 8 5.2 Migration to naming.
8、9 5.3 Universal Communications Identifier (UCI)12 5.4 Conclusions 12 6 Network aspects .13 6.1 Network and routeing types13 6.2 Use of Internet names in telco networks 14 6.3 Support systems15 6.4 Conclusions 15 7 Use in services16 8 Regulatory issues16 9 Overall Conclusions .17 History 18 ETSI ETSI
9、 EG 202 236 V1.1.1 (2003-10) 4 Intellectual Property Rights IPRs essential or potentially essential to the present document may have been declared to ETSI. The information pertaining to these essential IPRs, if any, is publicly available for ETSI members and non-members, and can be found in ETSI SR
10、000 314: “Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs); Essential, or potentially Essential, IPRs notified to ETSI in respect of ETSI standards“, which is available from the ETSI Secretariat. Latest updates are available on the ETSI Web server (http:/webapp.etsi.org/IPR/home.asp). Pursuant to the ETSI IPR Po
11、licy, no investigation, including IPR searches, has been carried out by ETSI. No guarantee can be given as to the existence of other IPRs not referenced in ETSI SR 000 314 (or the updates on the ETSI Web server) which are, or may be, or may become, essential to the present document. Foreword This ET
12、SI Guide (EG) has been produced by ETSI Project Telecommunications and Internet Protocol Harmonization Over Networks (TIPHON). ETSI ETSI EG 202 236 V1.1.1 (2003-10) 5 1 Scope The present document considers the use of non-numeric names such as “userdomain“ for voice and other communications services
13、(These names may include numerals but are different from pure numbers such as are used in E.164). It evaluates: - The advantages and disadvantages of non numeric names compared to the more traditional use of numbers - The schemes for non-numeric names that are available for use and the advantages an
14、d disadvantages of creating new schemes or of modifying existing schemes - The implications for network design of using non-numeric names The present document primarily considers the use of “Internet names“ which is a general term for names of the form “userdomain“ where “domain“ is a “dot-string“ r
15、esolvable by the Domain Name System. (Email addresses, SIP addresses and Network Address Identifiers are particular instances of Internet names.) The reason for focusing on the use of Internet names is that this is the only global system of names that is both well established and growing. The conclu
16、sions of this report are not however limited to Internet names but would apply to any naming scheme because they relate to the generic nature of names and not the particulars of the Internet naming scheme. The present document takes account of human factors work carried out by ETSI-HF and in particu
17、lar the specification work on the Universal Communications Identifier (UCI) even though it is not immediately relevant because it uses numbers for its unique identifier. Its contents are not at variance with the work on UCI, as the latter sits at a higher level. UCI seeks to provide a top level sche
18、me with a single identifier for a given individual / persona, and via which a number of different communications services (each potentially with its own naming scheme and unique name for the individual) can be accessed. The present document considers the implications that arise when the naming schem
19、es for those individual services are non numeric. ENUM is not considered explicitly in the present document because ENUM is a proposed facility for relating E.164 numbers to non-numeric names and presupposes the existence of the non numeric names that are discussed here. 2 References The following d
20、ocuments contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of the present document. References are either specific (identified by date of publication and/or edition number or version number) or non-specific. For a specific reference, subsequent revisions do not apply. F
21、or a non-specific reference, the latest version applies. Referenced documents which are not found to be publicly available in the expected location might be found at http:/docbox.etsi.org/Reference. 1 ETSI EG 201 940: “Human Factors (HF); User identification solutions in converging networks“. 2 ETSI
22、 TR 101 326: “Telecommunications and Internet Protocol Harmonization Over Networks (TIPHON); The procedure for determining IP addresses for routeing packets on interconnected IP networks that support public telephony“. 3 Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2
23、002 on universal service and users rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive). ETSI ETSI EG 202 236 V1.1.1 (2003-10) 6 3 Abbreviations For the purposes of the present document, the following abbreviations apply: CLI Calling Line Identifier DNS Do
24、main Name System ICANN Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers IP Internet Protocol ISP Internet Service Provider LAN Local Area Network NGN Next Generation Network PSTN Public Switched Telephone Network SIM Subscriber Identity Module SIP Session Initiation Protocol TLD Top Level Domain
25、UCI Universal Communications Identifier 4 User aspects An earlier ETSI study, EG 201 940 1: User identification solutions in converging networks, examined the user aspects of current naming schemes and its conclusions are summarized in table 1. Table 1: Current identifiers (from EG 201 940 1) User R
26、equirements Name and Address Telephone Number Email Address Uniqueness * * * Memorability * * * Length * * Stability * * * Terminal Independence * * * Searchability * * Robustness * * * Meaningfulness * * Additional information * * * Authenticity * * *NOTE 1: * Meets requirement extremely well. NOTE
27、 2: * Does not meet requirement. The telephone number was rated comparatively low on uniqueness as, although each number is always unique, it may not be uniquely associated with a single person and the association with any person is impossible to guess from looking at the number. This study led to t
28、he proposal for a Universal Communications Identifier (UCI) that would consist of the combination of: - a unique number; - a user friendly name; - additional information. Users might typically have two UCIs, one for private use and one for business use. They would be supported by personal communicat
29、ions agents that would provide valuable additional functionality. The UCI continues to be studied within ETSI with the more recent work focusing on authentication and security. ETSI ETSI EG 202 236 V1.1.1 (2003-10) 7 The differences between the UCI work and the present document are that: - The UCI w
30、ork is aimed towards developing a new identification system whereas the present document focuses much more on the use of existing schemes, since the UCI has not yet been implemented and it is not clear whether it will be implemented. - The present document focuses on the use of non-numeric names, i.
31、e. names that do not rely on numbers for uniqueness, whereas the UCI is essentially a numerical scheme with added non-unique fields. The key attributes of any naming scheme are that it should be: - unique (so that each name relates to only a single user or terminal or line or group of lines, althoug
32、h more than one name may relate to the same user or terminal or line); - user friendly (to encourage their use and minimize misoperation). The concept of user-friendliness in a name contains at least the following different elements: - Ease of being remembered by a human. - Ease of identifying the p
33、erson or terminal or line from the name. - Ease of being written (or input to a terminal) without error. - Ease of being generated from first principles if the name is not known or has been forgotten (this is an advantage only when there are inadequate directory services). The first three of these e
34、lements can easily be substituted by intelligence in terminals, SIMs or the front ends of networks. The fourth of these elements covers the issue of finding the identifier to use for communications. For geographical E.164 numbers there are widely available directory services that enable the number t
35、o be found from the natural name and some part of the street address. Unfortunately these systems have not developed to embrace all the developments in E.164 nor the introduction and growth of Internet names. Unfortunately the attributes of uniqueness and user friendliness are not fully compatible.
36、For example, the existing ITU-T processes ensure that E.164 numbers possess uniqueness: however they are not inherently user friendly (although use of numbers for approaching 100 years has provided the benefit of familiarity). Conversely, alphanumeric naming schemes have the potential to be more use
37、r friendly but require methods to be developed to ensure uniqueness because natural names are not normally unique, and these are likely to reduce user friendliness. Thus Ezekiel.Q.Frogburgerdomain has a fair chance of being unique and is user friendly enough, but John Smith might ensure uniqueness b
38、y being identified as (say) john.97.smithdomain which is less user friendly. The problems of uniqueness are fewer if the context reduces the number of names to be handled. In the business context where the name is likely to have the form “userbusiness“ there will be less of an issue of uniqueness if
39、 the number of employees is small. There is however an additional problem when companies merge when each company has names with the same value of “user“ e.g. each company has a user called “John.Smith“. In the personal context, where users have not registered their own domain name, the Internet name
40、 has the form “userisp“ and names of this form are not portable between ISPs, in contrast to E.164 numbers which are portable in many countries. A further aspect concerns language and alphabet. Whilst names may be user friendly in one language, they are less friendly for non-native speakers of the l
41、anguage concerned. Furthermore because the names would use a specific alphabet they are also less user-friendly if the names exists originally in a different alphabet (e.g. Chinese) and there has to be a translation to the alphabet used for the naming scheme. The use of numbers has gradually overcom
42、e this obstacle for the telephone service as all cultures have learned to handle decimal numbers written in the Arabic form. In many respects, the advantages of non-numeric names can be realized without the need to build networks that can support them directly through the use of intelligence in term
43、inals, SIMs or network front ends that allows users to assign non-numeric names of their own creation to E.164 numbers. For example the name Fred can be assigned to the number +44 20 7111 2222. This is a local assignment and provided the user assigns the name “Fred“ only once for the set of numbers
44、and names stored in the terminal, the problem of uniqueness is overcome. This is the practice commonly used by users of mobile systems such as GSM. ETSI ETSI EG 202 236 V1.1.1 (2003-10) 8 It is likely that use of non numeric names will be adopted earlier in individual corporate networks than in publ
45、ic networks, owing to the fact that: Unique alphanumeric identifiers are already being used for accessing LANs (e.g. logging on) and the same identifiers could be used for communications. The trade-off of uniqueness vs user friendliness is much more favourable owing to the limited size of corporate
46、networks. In practice corporate networks would be likely to increase the use of non-numeric names by adopting the existing values of “user“ in “userdomain“ for new internal services. Overall the conclusions are that: - the main attraction of non-numeric names, which is user friendliness, is fundamen
47、tally limited by problems of uniqueness, language and alphabet. If the context can be restricted as in many corporate networks, these limitations have less effect. These limitations are easily overlooked by advocates of non-numeric names. - many of the issues of user friendliness that underlie the a
48、ttraction of non-numeric names would be solved by improvements in the handling of names by terminals, SIMs or network front ends, and in the scope and accessibility of directory services. 5 Available schemes 5.1 Internet naming By far the most commonly used non-numeric naming scheme at present is th
49、e Internet name of the form userdomain. The other main attempt to establish a non-numeric scheme was X.400 names but these proved to be less user friendly and the X.400 service has become obsolete. The issue is then whether an alternative scheme to Internet names should be developed or whether the Internet naming scheme needs to be altered or enhanced. Any naming scheme necessarily involves a combination of individual names, possibly belonging to various different categories, with a syntax for separating the
