Return to tldapps Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: Serge
Date/Time: Thu, November 2, 2000 at 9:13 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.0 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: Services vs. device addressing

Message:
 

 
        Hello,

Having met with the people behind the Telnic application I can only support their idea and believe in its future.

However, I want to highlight the fact that a naming scheme is usable for both devices and services. Thousands of voice services (IVR and more recently voice portals) have proliferated around the world. The Telnic initiave will finally give us an easy way to access those!

Let's take the example of a voice portal with 50 services. Each could be identified by its unique .tel name, such as stockquotes.tel. By saying the name of service instead of entering on my DTMF keypad a hard to remember number I get access to the service.

The issue of branding is also addressed that way, the services are not anonymous, hidden behind a number, anymore. Name clashes can be resolved by an appropriate advisory boards. I expect voice portals to rush for a massive "land grab" of .tel names if this scheme is used.

The further benefit of using .tel to name a service is to allow their seamless networking in the future (using VoIP or IN call transfers). What's the value of a voice portal if you can't access other voice portals from it? Creating a network of voice portals requires a coherent naming scheme - enters Telnic!

If you want to share similar thoughts with me, feel free to send me an Email at sergejf@yahoo.com.

Regards,

Serge
     

 


Message Thread:


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy