- From: Patrik Fältström <paf@swip.net>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 20:59:34 +0200
- To: "Vaha-Sipila Antti (NMP)" <antti.vaha-sipila@nmp.nokia.com>, "'EXT Larry Masinter'" <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Cc: "'uri@bunyip.com'" <uri@Bunyip.Com>
At 09.03 +0200 98-06-29, Vaha-Sipila Antti (NMP) wrote: >Or something to that effect, anyway. What do you think? >Note that the country code is omitted from the hierarchical URL. In a >situation where there is no area code (Denmark? Can anyone confirm >this?), would there then be null strings in the hierarchical URL? There are no are codes in Denmark, and it is also the case that the areas themselves are split in several areas in some qountries which are either geographical, administrative, or both. Those boundaries are not based on base 10 in the number series, just like class-less division of the IP address space is not done on base 10 (i.e. I think of the problem of delegating the IN-ADDR.ARPA zone according to the class-less boundaries). It is also the case that just because you can dial a certain number on your phone does not mean that that number is sent over the wire, and neither that that number is used between the switches -- just like a URL can be viewed in different ways. I just saw a recommendation in one GSM network in North America that their users should dial 401-123-1234, i.e. area code first without the '1'! The conclusion from my side is only that I see problems with starting beliving that we can do something about the highly unstructured telephone number allocation problem on the Internet. We can not, and from my point of view, should not. It is better if the URL is "just" phone:number. Patrik
Received on Monday, 29 June 1998 15:08:25 UTC