3 ms·

No it doesn't. E.164 is a closed system in which I cannot own my own identifier, in which interconnection is based on an outmoded billing system based on the no

No it doesn't. E.164 is a closed system in which I cannot own my own identifier, in which interconnection is based on an outmoded billing system based on the now false presumption of a circuit switched architecture, and any ability to contact other entities relies on the prior negotiation of some kind of contractual agreement with a carrier, whereas email permits agreement-free federation.

bcrl 5y ago
Yes it is. The same thing applies to both domain names and IP connectivity. You have to pay one of the small number of domain name providers / transit providers to register / transport your domain / BGP announcements for a regular fee. Sure there are multiple registrars / transit providers that you can deal with, but each TLD / region is overseen by a monopoly entity that can increase prices pretty easily. If you don't pay your registration fees for use of that unique identifier, you lose it. I can get E.164 numbers for $0.85/month from a VoIP provider, which is comparable to the cost of a domain name. There are plenty of VoIP providers that can port phone numbers from landlines or cell phones to VoIP. There are more similarities to domain registrars than differences.
- hlandau 5y ago
  And everything about this is a million times better than E.164. Whereas you pay for a number from a VoIP provider, this does not make the number "yours". Domain names are registered in one's name (and sometimes traded for substantial amounts of money). There are certainly things that could be improved about the domain name industry, but it's still better than the E.164 situation. The number you get from a VoIP provider is also at substantial risk of being in a "ghetto", whereby it mysteriously cannot receive verification code SMSes, or is discriminated against by tech companies who want a "real" number, etc.
  - bcrl 5y ago
    The domain isn't "mine" either. If I don't pay for it, I lose it. If someone sues me for trademark infringement, I can lose it. So long as I keep paying my bill, the phone number is mine, and even better is that the interaction with telephone carriers is highly regulated, and the regulations have withstood the test of time extremely well. Even if I fail to pay my bill one month for a phone number, I have the assurance that the carrier cannot just throw my number away on a whim as is the case with the business relationship most ISPs have with their customers. Walking away from E.164 means walking away from decades of consumer protections enshrined in telecom regulations, and that's a pretty major loss. The perfect counter example is how email addresses are treated. The vast majority of consumers went with email addresses provided by their internet providers when they signed up 20 years ago. As a competitive ISP, there is no process comparable to Local Number Porting available for email addresses. I have potential customers who have run their business through somename@bigtelcoisp.com for so long that they refuse to change ISPs because they are unwilling to change that email address. If emails were regulated more like phone numbers, end users would be able to change ISPs and get a forwarding record. That is absolutely not the case for IP addresses and email addresses. That's a pretty major hole that you are ignoring.
    - necovek 5y ago
      The biggest difference technically is that with email, you can register your domain name and have control of it (and you even have the freedom to move between registrars). With a phone number, legislation was required to enable some of that (keeping a phone number when switching operators). It still does not work across countries, for instance. With legislation, email forwarding could be just as simple indeed, but at least you can solve that problem once yourself! Basically, for all its problems, email is a technically better solution. There are practical problems with email too: Gmail will frequently put my emails into spam folders of recipients because my mail server doesn't send enough emails regularly to be treated as trusted server (perhaps I need to start spamming my own gmail accounts :)). I've had my domains for years (15+) so the risk of losing them is mostly theoretical (other than forgetting to pay and lack of consumer protection past 1 month due to domain squatting).
      - bcrl 5y ago
        The same is true with phone numbers. You can migrate a phone number between carriers via Local Number Porting. The percentage of people that register their own domains are in the minority, and probably are a very small minority. The bulk of the public use domains controlled by their email provider, and they have need of something like LNP. If email had a process similar to LNP to migrate addresses between providers, I'd agree with you, but it doesn't and nobody is pushing to do that either. Technically it would not be that hard to do. I'd love it if there was a redirect mechanism where attempts to deliver to a ported email address returned an SMTP code telling the sender to deliver a given address to another MX record. Email forwarding as currently implemented is absolutely awful as much of the information about the original sender (like IP address) is lost.

bcrl 5y ago

Yes it is. The same thing applies to both domain names and IP connectivity. You have to pay one of the small number of domain name providers / transit providers to register / transport your domain / BGP announcements for a regular fee. Sure there are multiple registrars / transit providers that you can deal with, but each TLD / region is overseen by a monopoly entity that can increase prices pretty easily. If you don't pay your registration fees for use of that unique identifier, you lose it. I can get E.164 numbers for $0.85/month from a VoIP provider, which is comparable to the cost of a domain name. There are plenty of VoIP providers that can port phone numbers from landlines or cell phones to VoIP. There are more similarities to domain registrars than differences.

hlandau 5y ago
And everything about this is a million times better than E.164. Whereas you pay for a number from a VoIP provider, this does not make the number "yours". Domain names are registered in one's name (and sometimes traded for substantial amounts of money). There are certainly things that could be improved about the domain name industry, but it's still better than the E.164 situation. The number you get from a VoIP provider is also at substantial risk of being in a "ghetto", whereby it mysteriously cannot receive verification code SMSes, or is discriminated against by tech companies who want a "real" number, etc.
- bcrl 5y ago
  The domain isn't "mine" either. If I don't pay for it, I lose it. If someone sues me for trademark infringement, I can lose it. So long as I keep paying my bill, the phone number is mine, and even better is that the interaction with telephone carriers is highly regulated, and the regulations have withstood the test of time extremely well. Even if I fail to pay my bill one month for a phone number, I have the assurance that the carrier cannot just throw my number away on a whim as is the case with the business relationship most ISPs have with their customers. Walking away from E.164 means walking away from decades of consumer protections enshrined in telecom regulations, and that's a pretty major loss. The perfect counter example is how email addresses are treated. The vast majority of consumers went with email addresses provided by their internet providers when they signed up 20 years ago. As a competitive ISP, there is no process comparable to Local Number Porting available for email addresses. I have potential customers who have run their business through somename@bigtelcoisp.com for so long that they refuse to change ISPs because they are unwilling to change that email address. If emails were regulated more like phone numbers, end users would be able to change ISPs and get a forwarding record. That is absolutely not the case for IP addresses and email addresses. That's a pretty major hole that you are ignoring.
  - necovek 5y ago
    The biggest difference technically is that with email, you can register your domain name and have control of it (and you even have the freedom to move between registrars). With a phone number, legislation was required to enable some of that (keeping a phone number when switching operators). It still does not work across countries, for instance. With legislation, email forwarding could be just as simple indeed, but at least you can solve that problem once yourself! Basically, for all its problems, email is a technically better solution. There are practical problems with email too: Gmail will frequently put my emails into spam folders of recipients because my mail server doesn't send enough emails regularly to be treated as trusted server (perhaps I need to start spamming my own gmail accounts :)). I've had my domains for years (15+) so the risk of losing them is mostly theoretical (other than forgetting to pay and lack of consumer protection past 1 month due to domain squatting).
    - bcrl 5y ago
      The same is true with phone numbers. You can migrate a phone number between carriers via Local Number Porting. The percentage of people that register their own domains are in the minority, and probably are a very small minority. The bulk of the public use domains controlled by their email provider, and they have need of something like LNP. If email had a process similar to LNP to migrate addresses between providers, I'd agree with you, but it doesn't and nobody is pushing to do that either. Technically it would not be that hard to do. I'd love it if there was a redirect mechanism where attempts to deliver to a ported email address returned an SMTP code telling the sender to deliver a given address to another MX record. Email forwarding as currently implemented is absolutely awful as much of the information about the original sender (like IP address) is lost.