<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Hello,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> I am researching whether or not ENUM is a viable solution for carrier-grade infrastructure routing. It has been suggested that utilizing DNS for number lookups within an internal network is a very powerful, redundant way of handling large volumes of traffic while also gaining caching and many years of DNS infrastructure reliability in one shot.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> Things is, I can't figure out why a 10+ year technology doesn't have excellent penetration if it's this good. I can guess that hooking a bunch of DNS servers to potentially SQL-based DNS servers has the argument of "why not just go direct to the DB to reduce latency/complexity" but DNS provides other advantages, ranging from local caching on each box (comes "free") to inherent redundancy with multiple name servers (though there's a delay in failing over obviously). And of course, if done properly with partitioning, DNS can be done via flat-files for ultimate speed.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> So, yeah, looking for any good reads on ENUM or other DNS related services, both pros & cons. Suggestions welcome.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>- Darren<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>