RFC 6116: The E.164 to Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Application (ENUM)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document discusses the use of the Domain Name System (DNS) for storage of data associated with E.164 numbers, and for resolving those numbers into URIs that can be used (for example) in telephony call setup. This document also describes how the DNS can be used to identify the services associated with an E.164 number. This document obsoletes RFC 3761. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6116
- Published
- March 2011
- Authors
- S. Bradner; L. Conroy; K. Fujiwara
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- rai
- Pages
- 22
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoletes:
- RFC 3761
Topics
Standards lineage
This document is one revision in a chain of 4 RFCs, each formally replacing the one before it.
- RFC 2916 (2000)
- RFC 3761 (2004)
- RFC 6116 (2011)
- RFC 6117 (2011) ✓
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5483ENUM Implementation Issues and ExperiencesCurrent
March 2009
- RFC 5346Operational Requirements for ENUM-Based Softswitch UseCurrent
October 2008
- RFC 4759The ENUM Dip Indicator Parameter for the "tel" URICurrent
December 2006
- RFC 2916E.164 number and DNSObsoleted
September 2000
- RFC 4143Facsimile Using Internet Mail (IFAX) Service of ENUMUpdated
November 2005
- RFC 3404Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Four: The Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI)Current
October 2002
- RFC 3403Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Three: The Domain Name System (DNS) DatabaseCurrent
October 2002
- RFC 3402Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS) Part Two: The AlgorithmCurrent
October 2002
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?