draft-ietf-ecrit-requirements-13.txt | rfc5012.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
ECRIT H. Schulzrinne | Network Working Group H. Schulzrinne | |||
Internet-Draft Columbia U. | Request for Comments: 5012 Columbia U. | |||
Intended status: Standards Track R. Marshall, Ed. | Category: Informational R. Marshall, Ed. | |||
Expires: September 3, 2007 TCS | TCS | |||
March 2, 2007 | January 2008 | |||
Requirements for Emergency Context Resolution with Internet | ||||
Technologies | ||||
draft-ietf-ecrit-requirements-13 | ||||
Status of this Memo | ||||
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any | ||||
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware | ||||
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes | ||||
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. | ||||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | ||||
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | ||||
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- | ||||
Drafts. | ||||
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | ||||
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | ||||
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | ||||
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | ||||
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | ||||
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. | ||||
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | ||||
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. | ||||
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 3, 2007. | Requirements for Emergency Context Resolution with | |||
Internet Technologies | ||||
Copyright Notice | Status of This Memo | |||
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). | This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does | |||
not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this | ||||
memo is unlimited. | ||||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
This document defines terminology and enumerates requirements for the | This document defines terminology and enumerates requirements for the | |||
context resolution of emergency calls placed by the public using | context resolution of emergency calls placed by the public using | |||
voice-over-IP (VoIP) and general Internet multimedia systems, where | voice-over-IP (VoIP) and general Internet multimedia systems, where | |||
Internet protocols are used end-to-end. | Internet protocols are used end to end. | |||
Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | |||
2. Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 2. Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
3.1. Emergency Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3.1. Emergency Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
3.2. Service Providers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3.2. Service Providers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
3.3. Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.3. Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
3.4. Call Routing Entities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.4. Call Routing Entities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
3.5. Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.5. Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
3.6. Identifiers, Numbers and Dial Strings . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 3.6. Identifiers, Numbers, and Dial Strings . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
3.7. Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.7. Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
4. Basic Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 4. Basic Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
5. High-Level Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 5. High-Level Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
6. Identifying the Caller's Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 6. Identifying the Caller's Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
7. Emergency Service Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 7. Emergency Service Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
8. Mapping Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 8. Mapping Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
11. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | 11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
12. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | ||||
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | ||||
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 32 | ||||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
Users of both voice-centric (telephone-like) and non-voice services | Users of both voice-centric (telephone-like) and non-voice services, | |||
such as text communication for hearing disabled users (RFC 3351 | such as text communication for hearing-disabled users (see [RFC3351] | |||
[RFC3351]) expect to be able to initiate a request for help in case | and [toip]), expect to be able to initiate a request for help in case | |||
of an emergency. | of an emergency. | |||
Unfortunately, the existing mechanisms to support emergency calls | Unfortunately, the existing mechanisms to support emergency calls | |||
that have evolved within the public circuit-switched telephone | that have evolved within the public circuit-switched telephone | |||
network (PSTN) are not appropriate to handle evolving IP-based voice, | network (PSTN) are not appropriate to handle evolving IP-based voice, | |||
text and real-time multimedia communications. This document outlines | text, and real-time multimedia communications. This document | |||
the key requirements that IP-based end systems and network elements, | outlines the key requirements that IP-based end systems and network | |||
such as Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] proxies, need to | elements, such as Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] | |||
satisfy in order to provide emergency call services, which at a | proxies, need to satisfy in order to provide emergency call services, | |||
minimum, offer the same functionality as existing PSTN services, with | which at a minimum, offer the same functionality as existing PSTN | |||
the additional overall goal of making emergency calling more robust, | services, with the additional overall goal of making emergency | |||
less costly to implement, and multimedia-capable. | calling more robust, less costly to implement, and multimedia- | |||
capable. | ||||
This document only focuses on end-to-end IP-based calls, i.e., where | This document only focuses on end-to-end IP-based calls, i.e., where | |||
the emergency call originates from an IP end system and terminates in | the emergency call originates from an IP end system and terminates in | |||
an IP-capable PSAP, conveyed entirely over an IP network. | an IP-capable public safety answering point (PSAP), conveyed entirely | |||
over an IP network. | ||||
We first define terminology in Section 3. The document then outlines | We first define terminology in Section 3. The document then outlines | |||
various functional issues which relate to placing an IP-based | various functional issues that relate to placing an IP-based | |||
emergency call, including a description of baseline requirements | emergency call, including a description of baseline requirements | |||
(Section 5), identification of the emergency caller's location | (Section 5), identification of the emergency caller's location | |||
(Section 6), use of a service identifier to declare a call to be an | (Section 6), use of a service identifier to declare a call to be an | |||
emergency call (Section 7), and finally, the mapping function | emergency call (Section 7), and finally, the mapping function | |||
required to route the call to the appropriate PSAP (Section 8). | required to route the call to the appropriate PSAP (Section 8). | |||
The primary purpose of the mapping protocol is to produce a PSAP URI | The primary purpose of the mapping protocol is to produce a PSAP URI | |||
drawn from a preferred set of URI schemes such as SIP or SIPS URIs, | drawn from a preferred set of URI schemes such as SIP or SIPS URIs, | |||
based on both location information [RFC4119] and a service identifier | based on both location information [RFC4119] and a service identifier | |||
in order to facilitate the IP end-to-end completion of an emergency | in order to facilitate the IP end-to-end completion of an emergency | |||
call. | call. | |||
Aside from obtaining a PSAP URI, the mapping protocol is useful for | Aside from obtaining a PSAP URI, the mapping protocol is useful for | |||
obtaining other information as well. There may be a case, for | obtaining other information as well. There may be a case, for | |||
example, where an appropriate emergency number is not known, only | example, where an appropriate emergency number is not known, only the | |||
location. The mapping protocol can then return a geographically | location. The mapping protocol can then return a geographically | |||
appropriate emergency number based on the input. | appropriate emergency number based on the input. | |||
Since some PSAPs may not immediately support IP, or because some user | Since some PSAPs may not immediately support IP, or because some user | |||
equipment (UE) may not initially support emergency service | equipment (UE) may not initially support emergency service | |||
identifiers, it may be necessary to also support emergency service | identifiers, it may be necessary to also support emergency service | |||
identifiers that utilize less preferred URI schemes, such as a tel | identifiers that utilize less-preferred URI schemes, such as a tel | |||
URI in order to complete an emergency call via the PSTN. | URI in order to complete an emergency call via the PSTN. | |||
Identification of the caller, while not incompatible with the | Identification of the caller, while not incompatible with the | |||
requirements for messaging outlined within this document, is | requirements for messaging outlined within this document, is | |||
considered to be outside the scope of this document. | considered to be outside the scope of this document. | |||
Location is required for two separate purposes, first, to support the | Location is required for two separate purposes: first, to support the | |||
routing of the emergency call to the appropriate PSAP and second, to | routing of the emergency call to the appropriate PSAP and second, to | |||
display the caller's location to the call taker to help in | display the caller's location to the call taker to help in | |||
dispatching emergency assistance to the appropriate location. | dispatching emergency assistance to the appropriate location. | |||
This latter use, the display of location information to the PSAP, is | This latter use, the display of location information to the PSAP, is | |||
orthogonal to the mapping protocol, and is outside the scope of this | orthogonal to the mapping protocol, and is outside the scope of this | |||
document. | document. | |||
2. Requirements Terminology | 2. Requirements Terminology | |||
skipping to change at page 6, line 22 | skipping to change at page 3, line 50 | |||
caller, except by the call taker asking the caller. | caller, except by the call taker asking the caller. | |||
Enhanced emergency service: In enhanced emergency service, the PSAP | Enhanced emergency service: In enhanced emergency service, the PSAP | |||
call taker can determine the caller's current location. | call taker can determine the caller's current location. | |||
3.2. Service Providers | 3.2. Service Providers | |||
Internet Access Provider (IAP): An organization that provides | Internet Access Provider (IAP): An organization that provides | |||
physical and data link (layer 2) network connectivity to its | physical and data link (layer 2) network connectivity to its | |||
customers or users, e.g., through digital subscriber lines, cable | customers or users, e.g., through digital subscriber lines, cable | |||
TV plants, Ethernet, leased lines or radio frequencies. Examples | TV plants, Ethernet, leased lines, or radio frequencies. Examples | |||
of such organizations include telecommunication carriers, | of such organizations include telecommunication carriers, | |||
municipal utilities, larger enterprises with their own network | municipal utilities, larger enterprises with their own network | |||
infrastructure, and government organizations such as the military. | infrastructure, and government organizations, such as the | |||
military. | ||||
Internet Service Provider (ISP): An organization that provides IP | Internet Service Provider (ISP): An organization that provides IP | |||
network-layer services to its customers or users. This entity may | network-layer services to its customers or users. This entity may | |||
or may not provide the physical-layer and data link (layer-2) | or may not provide the physical-layer and data link (layer-2) | |||
connectivity, such as fiber or Ethernet, i.e., it may or may not | connectivity, such as fiber or Ethernet, i.e., it may or may not | |||
play the role of an IAP. | play the role of an IAP. | |||
Application Service Provider (ASP): The organization or entity that | Application Service Provider (ASP): The organization or entity that | |||
provides application-layer services, which may include voice (see | provides application-layer services, which may include voice (see | |||
"Voice Service Provider"). This entity can be a private | "Voice Service Provider"). This entity can be a private | |||
individual, an enterprise, a government, or a service provider. | individual, an enterprise, a government, or a service provider. | |||
An ASP is more general than a Voice Service Provider, since | An ASP is more general than a Voice Service Provider, since | |||
emergency calls may use other media beyond voice, including text | emergency calls may use other media beyond voice, including text | |||
and video. For a particular user, the ASP may or may not be the | and video. For a particular user, the ASP may or may not be the | |||
same organization as his IAP or ISP. | same organization as his IAP or ISP. | |||
Voice Service Provider (VSP): A specific type of Application Service | Voice Service Provider (VSP): A specific type of Application Service | |||
Provider which provides voice related services based on IP, such | Provider that provides voice related services based on IP, such as | |||
as call routing, a SIP URI, or PSTN termination. In this | call routing, a SIP URI, or PSTN termination. In this document, | |||
document, unless noted otherwise, any reference to "Voice Service | unless noted otherwise, any reference to "Voice Service Provider" | |||
Provider" or "VSP" may be used interchangeably with "Application/ | or "VSP" may be used interchangeably with "Application/Voice | |||
Voice Service Provider" or "ASP/VSP". | Service Provider" or "ASP/VSP". | |||
3.3. Actors | 3.3. Actors | |||
(Emergency) caller: The term "caller" or "emergency caller" refer to | (Emergency) caller: The term "caller" or "emergency caller" refers | |||
the person placing an emergency call or sending an emergency | to the person placing an emergency call or sending an emergency | |||
instant message (IM). | instant message (IM). | |||
User Equipment (UE): User equipment is the device or software | User Equipment (UE): User equipment is the device or software | |||
operated by the caller to place an emergency call. A SIP user | operated by the caller to place an emergency call. A SIP user | |||
agent (UA) is an example of a UE. | agent (UA) is an example of user equipment. | |||
Call taker: A call taker is an agent at the PSAP that accepts calls | Call taker: A call taker is an agent at the PSAP that accepts calls | |||
and may dispatch emergency help. Sometimes the functions of call | and may dispatch emergency help. Sometimes the functions of call | |||
taking and dispatching are handled by different groups of people, | taking and dispatching are handled by different groups of people, | |||
but these divisions of labor are not generally visible to the | but these divisions of labor are not generally visible to the | |||
caller and thus do not concern us here. | caller and thus do not concern us here. | |||
3.4. Call Routing Entities | 3.4. Call Routing Entities | |||
Emergency Service Routing Proxy (ESRP): An ESRP is an emergency call | Emergency Service Routing Proxy (ESRP): An ESRP is an emergency call | |||
routing support entity that invokes the location-to-PSAP URI | routing support entity that invokes the location-to-PSAP URI | |||
mapping function, to return an appropriate PSAP URI, or the URI | mapping function, to return an appropriate PSAP URI, or the URI | |||
for another ESRP. Client mapping requests could also be performed | for another ESRP. Client mapping requests could also be performed | |||
by a number of entities, including entities that instantiate the | by a number of entities, including entities that instantiate the | |||
SIP proxy role and the SIP user agent client role. | SIP proxy role and the SIP user agent client role. | |||
Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP): Physical location where | Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP): A PSAP is a facility where | |||
emergency calls are received under the responsibility of a public | emergency calls are received under the responsibility of a public | |||
authority. (This terminology is used by both ETSI, in ETSI SR 002 | authority. (This terminology is used by both the European | |||
180, and NENA.) In the United Kingdom, PSAPs are called Operator | Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), in ETSI SR 002 180, | |||
Assistance Centres, in New Zealand, Communications Centres. | and the National Emergency Number Association (NENA).) In the | |||
Within this document, it is assumed, unless stated otherwise, that | United Kingdom, PSAPs are called Operator Assistance Centres; in | |||
PSAPs support the receipt of emergency calls over IP, using | New Zealand, Communications Centres. Within this document, it is | |||
appropriate application layer protocols such as SIP for call | assumed, unless stated otherwise, that PSAPs support the receipt | |||
signaling and RTP for media. | of emergency calls over IP, using appropriate application layer | |||
protocols, such as SIP for call signaling and RTP for media. | ||||
3.5. Location | 3.5. Location | |||
Location: A geographic identification assigned to a region or | Location: A geographic identification assigned to a region or | |||
feature based on a specific coordinate system, or by other precise | feature based on a specific coordinate system, or by other precise | |||
information such as a street number and name. It can be either a | information such as a street number and name. It can be either a | |||
civic or geographic location. | civic or geographic location. | |||
Civic location: A described location based on some reference system, | Civic location: A described location based on some reference system, | |||
such as jurisdictional region or postal delivery grid. A street | such as jurisdictional region or postal delivery grid. A street | |||
address is a common example of a civic location. | address is a common example of a civic location. | |||
Geographic location: A reference to a point which is able to be | Geographic location: A reference to a point that is able to be | |||
located as described by a set of defined coordinates within a | located, as described by a set of defined coordinates within a | |||
geographic coordinate system, such as latitude and longitude | geographic coordinate system, such as latitude and longitude | |||
within the WGS-84 datum. For example, 2-D geographic location is | within the WGS-84 datum. For example, a 2-D geographic location | |||
defined as an (x,y) coordinate value pair according to the | is defined as an (x,y) coordinate value pair according to the | |||
distance north or south of the equator and east or west of the | distance north or south of the equator and east or west of the | |||
prime meridian. | prime meridian. | |||
Location validation: A caller location is considered valid if the | Location validation: A caller location is considered valid if the | |||
civic or geographic location is recognizable within an acceptable | civic or geographic location is recognizable within an acceptable | |||
location reference system (e.g., United States Postal Address or | location reference system (e.g., United States Postal Address or | |||
the WGS-84 datum) and can be mapped to one or more PSAPs. While | the WGS-84 datum) and can be mapped to one or more PSAPs. While | |||
it is desirable to determine that a location exists, validation | it is desirable to determine that a location exists, validation | |||
may not ensure that such a location exists, but rather may only | may not ensure that such a location exists, but rather may only | |||
ensure that the location falls within some range of known values. | ensure that the location falls within some range of known values. | |||
Location validation ensures that a location is able to be | Location validation ensures that a location is able to be | |||
referenced for mapping, but makes no assumption about the | referenced for mapping, but makes no assumption about the | |||
association between the caller and the caller's location. | association between the caller and the caller's location. | |||
3.6. Identifiers, Numbers and Dial Strings | 3.6. Identifiers, Numbers, and Dial Strings | |||
(Emergency) service number: The (emergency) service number is a | (Emergency) service number: The (emergency) service number is a | |||
string of digits used to reach the (emergency) service. The | string of digits used to reach the (emergency) service. The | |||
emergency service number is often just called the emergency | emergency service number is often just called the emergency | |||
number. It is the number typically dialed on devices directly | number. It is the number typically dialed on devices directly | |||
connected to the PSTN and the number reserved for emergency calls | connected to the PSTN and the number reserved for emergency calls | |||
by national or regional numbering authorities. It only contains | by national or regional numbering authorities. It only contains | |||
the digits 0 through 9, # and *. The service number may depend on | the digits 0 through 9, #, and *. The service number may depend | |||
the location of the caller. For example, the general emergency | on the location of the caller. For example, the general emergency | |||
service number in the United States is 911 and the poison control | service number in the United States is 911 and the poison control | |||
service number is 18002221222. In most cases, the service number | service number is 18002221222. In most cases, the service number | |||
and dial string are the same; they may differ in some private | and dial string are the same; they may differ in some private | |||
phone networks. A service number may be carried in tel URLs | phone networks. A service number may be carried in tel URLs | |||
[RFC3966], along with a context identifier. In the North American | [RFC3966], along with a context identifier. In the North American | |||
numbering plan, some service numbers are also three-digit N11 or | numbering plan, some service numbers are three-digit N11 or | |||
service codes, but not all emergency numbers have three digits. A | service codes, but not all emergency numbers have three digits. A | |||
caller may have to dial a service dial string (below) that differs | caller may have to dial a service dial string (below) that differs | |||
from the service number when using a PBX. | from the service number when using a PBX. | |||
(Emergency) service dial string: The service dial string identifies | (Emergency) service dial string: The service dial string identifies | |||
the string of digits that a caller must dial to reach a particular | the string of digits that a caller must dial to reach a particular | |||
(emergency) service. In devices directly connected to the PSTN, | (emergency) service. In devices directly connected to the PSTN, | |||
the service dial string is the same as the service number and may | the service dial string is the same as the service number and may | |||
thus depend on the location of the caller. However, in private | thus depend on the location of the caller. However, in private | |||
phone networks, such as in PBXs, the service dial string consists | phone networks, such as in PBXs, the service dial string consists | |||
skipping to change at page 9, line 13 | skipping to change at page 6, line 47 | |||
emergency services in the United States might be 9911. Dial | emergency services in the United States might be 9911. Dial | |||
strings may contain indications of pauses or wait-for-secondary- | strings may contain indications of pauses or wait-for-secondary- | |||
dial-tone indications. Service dial strings are outside the scope | dial-tone indications. Service dial strings are outside the scope | |||
of this document. | of this document. | |||
(Emergency) service identifier: The (emergency) service identifier | (Emergency) service identifier: The (emergency) service identifier | |||
describes the emergency service, independent of the user interface | describes the emergency service, independent of the user interface | |||
mechanism, the signaling protocol that is used to reach the | mechanism, the signaling protocol that is used to reach the | |||
service, or the caller's geographic location. It is a protocol | service, or the caller's geographic location. It is a protocol | |||
constant and used within the mapping and signaling protocols. An | constant and used within the mapping and signaling protocols. An | |||
example is the service URN [I-D.ietf-ecrit-service-urn]. | example is the service URN [RFC5031]. | |||
(Emergency) service URL: The service URL is a protocol-specific | (Emergency) service URL: The service URL is a protocol-specific | |||
(e.g., SIP) or protocol-agnostic (e.g., im: [RFC3860]) identifier | (e.g., SIP) or protocol-agnostic (e.g., im: [RFC3860]) identifier | |||
which contains the address of the PSAP or other emergency service. | that contains the address of the PSAP or other emergency service. | |||
It depends on the specific signaling or data transport protocol | It depends on the specific signaling or data transport protocol | |||
used to reach the emergency service. | used to reach the emergency service. | |||
Service URN: A service URN is an implementation of a service | Service URN: A service URN is an implementation of a service | |||
identifier, which can be applied to both emergency and non- | identifier, which can be applied to both emergency and non- | |||
emergency contexts, e.g., urn:service:sos or | emergency contexts, e.g., urn:service:sos or | |||
urn:service:counseling. Within this document, service URNs are | urn:service:counseling. Within this document, service URNs are | |||
referred to as 'emergency service URNs' | referred to as 'emergency service URNs' [RFC5031]. | |||
[I-D.ietf-ecrit-service-urn]. | ||||
Home emergency number: A home emergency number is the emergency | Home emergency number: A home emergency number is the emergency | |||
number valid at the caller's customary home location, e.g., his | number valid at the caller's customary home location, e.g., his | |||
permanent residence. The home location may or may not coincide | permanent residence. The home location may or may not coincide | |||
with the service area of the caller's VSP. | with the service area of the caller's VSP. | |||
Home emergency dial string: A home dial string is the dial string | Home emergency dial string: A home dial string is the dial string | |||
valid at the caller's customary home location, e.g., his permanent | valid at the caller's customary home location, e.g., his permanent | |||
residence. | residence. | |||
skipping to change at page 10, line 4 | skipping to change at page 7, line 36 | |||
Visited emergency number: A visited emergency number is the | Visited emergency number: A visited emergency number is the | |||
emergency number valid at the caller's current physical location. | emergency number valid at the caller's current physical location. | |||
We distinguish the visited emergency number if the caller is | We distinguish the visited emergency number if the caller is | |||
traveling outside his home region. | traveling outside his home region. | |||
Visited emergency dial string: A visited emergency dial string is | Visited emergency dial string: A visited emergency dial string is | |||
the dial string number valid at the caller's current physical | the dial string number valid at the caller's current physical | |||
location. | location. | |||
3.7. Mapping | 3.7. Mapping | |||
Mapping: Mapping is the process of resolving a location to one or | Mapping: Mapping is the process of resolving a location to one or | |||
more PSAP URIs which directly identify a PSAP, or point to an | more PSAP URIs that directly identify a PSAP, or point to an | |||
intermediary which knows about a PSAP and that is designated as | intermediary that knows about a PSAP and that is designated as | |||
responsible for serving that location. | responsible for serving that location. | |||
Mapping client: A mapping client interacts with the mapping server | Mapping client: A mapping client interacts with the mapping server | |||
to learn one or more PSAP URIs for a given location. | to learn one or more PSAP URIs for a given location. | |||
Mapping protocol: A protocol used to convey the mapping request and | Mapping protocol: A protocol used to convey the mapping request and | |||
response. | response. | |||
Mapping server: The mapping server holds information about the | Mapping server: The mapping server holds information about the | |||
location-to-PSAP URI mapping. | location-to-PSAP URI mapping. | |||
Mapping service: A network service which uses a distributed mapping | Mapping service: A network service that uses a distributed mapping | |||
protocol to perform a mapping between a location and a PSAP, or | protocol to perform a mapping between a location and a PSAP, or | |||
intermediary which knows about the PSAP, and is used to assist in | intermediary that knows about the PSAP, and is used to assist in | |||
routing an emergency call. | routing an emergency call. | |||
4. Basic Actors | 4. Basic Actors | |||
In order to support emergency services covering a large physical | In order to support emergency services covering a large physical | |||
area, various infrastructure elements are necessary, including | area, various infrastructure elements are necessary, including | |||
Internet Access Providers (IAPs), Application/Voice Service Providers | Internet Access Providers (IAPs), Application/Voice Service Providers | |||
(ASP/VSPs), Emergency Service Routing Proxy (ESRP) providers, mapping | (ASP/VSPs), Emergency Service Routing Proxy (ESRP) providers, mapping | |||
service providers, and PSAPs. | service providers, and PSAPs. | |||
skipping to change at page 11, line 46 | skipping to change at page 8, line 51 | |||
| | (7) | | +----+--+ | | | (7) | | +----+--+ | |||
| (8) | +------------>| | | | (8) | +------------>| | | |||
+--------------+----------------------->| PSAP | | +--------------+----------------------->| PSAP | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
|Application/ | +----+--+ | |Application/ | +----+--+ | |||
|Voice | | |Voice | | |||
|Service | | |Service | | |||
|Provider | | |Provider | | |||
+---------------------+ | +---------------------+ | |||
Figure 1: Framework for emergency call routing | Figure 1: Framework for Emergency Call Routing | |||
Figure 1 shows the interaction between the entities involved in the | Figure 1 shows the interaction between the entities involved in the | |||
call. There are a number of different deployment choices, as can be | call. There are a number of different deployment choices, as can be | |||
easily seen from the figure. | easily seen from the figure. | |||
Is the Internet Access Provider also the Application/Voice Service | Is the Internet Access Provider also the Application/Voice Service | |||
Provider? In the Internet today these roles are typically provided | Provider? In the Internet today, the roles of Internet access | |||
by different entities. As a consequence, the Application/Voice | provider and application/voice service provider are typically | |||
Service Provider is typically not able to directly determine the | provided by different entities. As a consequence, the Application/ | |||
physical location of the emergency caller. | Voice Service Provider is typically not able to directly determine | |||
the physical location of the emergency caller. | ||||
The overlapping squares in the figure indicate that some functions | The overlapping squares in the figure indicate that some functions | |||
can be collapsed into a single entity. As an example, the | can be collapsed into a single entity. As an example, the | |||
Application/Voice Service Provider might be the same entity as the | Application/Voice Service Provider might be the same entity as the | |||
Internet Access Provider. There is, however, no requirement that | Internet Access Provider. There is, however, no requirement that | |||
this must be the case. Additionally, we consider that end systems | this must be the case. Additionally, we consider that end systems | |||
might act as their own ASP/VSP, e.g., either for enterprises or for | might act as their own ASP/VSP, e.g., either for enterprises or for | |||
residential users. | residential users. | |||
Various potential interactions between the entities depicted in | Various potential interactions between the entities depicted in | |||
Figure 1 are described below: | Figure 1 are described below: | |||
1. Location information might be available to the end host itself. | 1. Location information might be available to the end host itself. | |||
2. Location information might, however, also be obtained from the | 2. Location information might, however, also be obtained from the | |||
Internet Access Provider. | Internet Access Provider. | |||
3. The emergency caller might need to consult a mapping service to | 3. The emergency caller might need to consult a mapping service to | |||
determine the PSAP (or other relevant information) that is | determine the PSAP (or other relevant information) that is | |||
appropriate for the physical location of the emergency caller, | appropriate for the physical location of the emergency caller, | |||
possibly considering other attributes such as appropriate | possibly considering other attributes, such as appropriate | |||
language support by the emergency call taker. | language support by the emergency call taker. | |||
4. The emergency caller might get assistance for emergency call | 4. The emergency caller might get assistance for emergency call | |||
routing by infrastructure elements that are emergency call | routing by infrastructure elements that are emergency call | |||
routing support entities, such as an Emergency Service Routing | routing support entities, such as an Emergency Service Routing | |||
Proxy (ESRP) in SIP. | Proxy (ESRP) in SIP. | |||
5. Location information is used by emergency call routing support | 5. Location information is used by emergency call routing support | |||
entities for subsequent mapping requests. | entities for subsequent mapping requests. | |||
skipping to change at page 13, line 20 | skipping to change at page 10, line 25 | |||
Re1. Application/Voice service provider existence: The initiation | Re1. Application/Voice service provider existence: The initiation | |||
of an IP-based emergency call SHOULD NOT assume the existence of | of an IP-based emergency call SHOULD NOT assume the existence of | |||
an Application/Voice Service Provider (ASP/VSP). | an Application/Voice Service Provider (ASP/VSP). | |||
Motivation: The caller may not have an application/voice service | Motivation: The caller may not have an application/voice service | |||
provider. For example, a residence may have its own DNS domain | provider. For example, a residence may have its own DNS domain | |||
and run its own SIP proxy server for that domain. On a larger | and run its own SIP proxy server for that domain. On a larger | |||
scale, a university might provide voice services to its students | scale, a university might provide voice services to its students | |||
and staff, but might not be a telecommunication provider. | and staff, but might not be a telecommunication provider. | |||
Re2. International applicability: Regional, political and | Re2. International applicability: Regional, political, and | |||
organizational aspects MUST be considered during the design of | organizational aspects MUST be considered during the design of | |||
protocols and protocol extensions which support IP-based emergency | protocols and protocol extensions that support IP-based emergency | |||
calls. | calls. | |||
Motivation: It must be possible for a device or software developed | Motivation: It must be possible for a device or software developed | |||
or purchased in one country to place emergency calls in another | or purchased in one country to place emergency calls in another | |||
country. System components should not be biased towards a | country. System components should not be biased towards a | |||
particular set of emergency numbers or languages. Also, different | particular set of emergency numbers or languages. Also, different | |||
countries have evolved different ways of organizing emergency | countries have evolved different ways of organizing emergency | |||
services, e.g., either centralizing them or having smaller | services, e.g., either centralizing them or having smaller | |||
regional subdivisions such as United States counties or | regional subdivisions, such as the United States or | |||
municipalities handle emergency calls within their jurisdiction. | municipalities, handle emergency calls within their jurisdiction. | |||
Re3. Distributed administration: Deployment of IP-based emergency | Re3. Distributed administration: Deployment of IP-based emergency | |||
services MUST NOT depend on a single central administrative | services MUST NOT depend on a single central administrative | |||
authority. | authority. | |||
Motivation: The design of the mapping protocol must make it | Motivation: The design of the mapping protocol must make it | |||
possible to deploy and administer emergency calling features on a | possible to deploy and administer emergency calling features on a | |||
regional or national basis without requiring coordination with | regional or national basis without requiring coordination with | |||
other regions or nations. The system cannot assume, for example, | other regions or nations. The system cannot assume, for example, | |||
that there is a single global entity issuing certificates for | that there is a single global entity issuing certificates for | |||
PSAPs, ASP/VSPs, IAPs or other participants. | PSAPs, ASP/VSPs, IAPs, or other participants. | |||
Re4. Multi-mode communication: IP-based emergency calls MUST | Re4. Multi-mode communication: IP-based emergency calls MUST | |||
support multiple communication modes, including, for example, | support multiple communication modes, including, for example, | |||
audio, video and text. | audio, video, and text. | |||
Motivation: Within the PSTN, voice and text telephony (often | Motivation: Within the PSTN, voice and text telephony (often | |||
called TTY or text-phone in North America) are the only commonly | called TTY or text-phone in North America) are the only commonly | |||
supported media. Emergency calling must support a variety of | supported media. Emergency calling must support a variety of | |||
media. Such media should include voice, conversational text (RFC | media. Such media should include voice, conversational text (RFC | |||
4103 [RFC4103]), instant messaging and video. | 4103 [RFC4103]), instant messaging, and video. | |||
Re5. Mapping result usability: The mapping protocol MUST return one | Re5. Mapping result usability: The mapping protocol MUST return one | |||
or more URIs that are usable within a standard signaling protocol | or more URIs that are usable within a standard signaling protocol | |||
(i.e., without special emergency extensions). | (i.e., without special emergency extensions). | |||
Motivation: For example, a SIP URI which is returned by the | Motivation: For example, a SIP URI that is returned by the mapping | |||
mapping protocol needs to be usable by any SIP capable phone | protocol needs to be usable by any SIP-capable phone within a SIP- | |||
within a SIP initiated emergency call. This is in contrast to a | initiated emergency call. This is in contrast to a "special | |||
"special purpose" URI, which may not be recognizable by a legacy | purpose" URI, which may not be recognizable by a legacy SIP | |||
SIP device. | device. | |||
Re6. PSAP URI accessibility: The mapping protocol MUST support | Re6. PSAP URI accessibility: The mapping protocol MUST support | |||
interaction between the client and server where no enrollment to a | interaction between the client and server where no enrollment to a | |||
mapping service exists or is required. | mapping service exists or is required. | |||
Motivation: The mapping server may well be operated by a service | Motivation: The mapping server may well be operated by a service | |||
provider, but access to the server offering the mapping must not | provider, but access to the server offering the mapping must not | |||
require use of a specific ISP or ASP/VSP. | require use of a specific ISP or ASP/VSP. | |||
Re7. Common data structures and formats: The mapping protocol | Re7. Common data structures and formats: The mapping protocol | |||
SHOULD support common formats for location data. | SHOULD support common formats (e.g., PIDF-LO) for location data. | |||
Motivation: Location databases should not need to be transformed | Motivation: Location databases should not need to be transformed | |||
or modified in any unusual or unreasonable way in order for the | or modified in any unusual or unreasonable way in order for the | |||
mapping protocol to use the data. For example, a database which | mapping protocol to use the data. For example, a database that | |||
contains civic addresses used by location servers may be used for | contains civic addresses used by location servers may be used for | |||
multiple purposes and applications beyond emergency service | multiple purposes and applications beyond emergency service | |||
location-to-PSAP URI mapping. | location-to-PSAP URI mapping. | |||
Re8. Anonymous mapping: The mapping protocol MUST NOT require the | Re8. Anonymous mapping: The mapping protocol MUST NOT require the | |||
true identity of the target for which the location information is | true identity of the target for which the location information is | |||
attributed. | attributed. | |||
Motivation: Ideally, no identity information is provided via the | Motivation: Ideally, no identity information is provided via the | |||
mapping protocol. Where identity information is provided, it may | mapping protocol. Where identity information is provided, it may | |||
skipping to change at page 15, line 15 | skipping to change at page 12, line 15 | |||
6. Identifying the Caller's Location | 6. Identifying the Caller's Location | |||
Location can either be provided directly (by value), or via a pointer | Location can either be provided directly (by value), or via a pointer | |||
(by reference), and represents either a civic location, or a | (by reference), and represents either a civic location, or a | |||
geographic location. An important question is how and when to attach | geographic location. An important question is how and when to attach | |||
location information to the VoIP emergency signaling messages. In | location information to the VoIP emergency signaling messages. In | |||
general, we can distinguish three modes of operation of how a | general, we can distinguish three modes of operation of how a | |||
location is associated with an emergency call: | location is associated with an emergency call: | |||
UA-inserted: The caller's user agent inserts the location | UA-inserted: The caller's user agent inserts the location | |||
information into the call signaling message. | information into the call-signaling message. | |||
UA-referenced: The caller's user agent provides a pointer (i.e., a | UA-referenced: The caller's user agent provides a pointer (i.e., a | |||
location reference), via a permanent or temporary identifier, to | location reference), via a permanent or temporary identifier, to | |||
the location information, which is stored by a location server | the location information, which is stored by a location server | |||
somewhere else and then retrieved by the PSAP, ESRP, or other | somewhere else and then retrieved by the PSAP, ESRP, or other | |||
authorized entity. | authorized entity. | |||
Proxy-inserted: A proxy along the call path inserts the location or | Proxy-inserted: A proxy along the call path inserts the location or | |||
location reference. | location reference. | |||
skipping to change at page 16, line 12 | skipping to change at page 13, line 12 | |||
both the jurisdictional community name and the postal community | both the jurisdictional community name and the postal community | |||
name fields within the PIDF-LO [RFC4119] data. | name fields within the PIDF-LO [RFC4119] data. | |||
Motivation: The mapping protocol must accept queries with either a | Motivation: The mapping protocol must accept queries with either a | |||
postal or jurisdictional community name field, or both, and | postal or jurisdictional community name field, or both, and | |||
provide appropriate responses. If a mapping query contains only | provide appropriate responses. If a mapping query contains only | |||
one community name and the database contains both jurisdictional | one community name and the database contains both jurisdictional | |||
and postal community names, the mapping protocol response SHOULD | and postal community names, the mapping protocol response SHOULD | |||
return both community names. | return both community names. | |||
Lo4. Validation of civic location: The mapping protocol MUST | Lo4. Validation of civic location: The mapping protocol MUST be | |||
support location validation for civic locations (street | able to report the results of validating civic locations (street | |||
addresses). | addresses). | |||
Motivation: Location validation provides an opportunity to help | Motivation: Location validation provides an opportunity to help | |||
ascertain ahead of time whether or not a successful mapping to the | ascertain ahead of time whether or not a successful mapping to the | |||
appropriate PSAP will likely occur when it is required. | appropriate PSAP will likely occur when it is required. | |||
Validation may also help to avoid delays during emergency call | Validation may also help to avoid delays during emergency call | |||
setup due to invalid location data. | setup due to invalid location data. | |||
Lo5. Information about location data used for mapping: The mapping | Lo5. Information about location data used for mapping: The mapping | |||
protocol MUST support the ability to provide ancillary information | protocol MUST support the ability to provide ancillary information | |||
skipping to change at page 16, line 46 | skipping to change at page 13, line 46 | |||
support a mechanism to contact an appropriate authority to resolve | support a mechanism to contact an appropriate authority to resolve | |||
mapping-related issues for the queried location. For example, the | mapping-related issues for the queried location. For example, the | |||
querier may want to report problems with the response values or | querier may want to report problems with the response values or | |||
indicate that the mapping database is mistaken on declaring a | indicate that the mapping database is mistaken on declaring a | |||
civic location as non-existent. | civic location as non-existent. | |||
Motivation: Initially, authorities may provide URLs where a human | Motivation: Initially, authorities may provide URLs where a human | |||
user can report problems with an address or location. In | user can report problems with an address or location. In | |||
addition, web services may be defined to automate such reporting. | addition, web services may be defined to automate such reporting. | |||
For example, the querier may wish to report that the mapping | For example, the querier may wish to report that the mapping | |||
database may be missing a newly-built or renamed street or house | database may be missing a newly built or renamed street or house | |||
number. | number. | |||
Lo7. Limits to validation: Successful validation of a civic | Lo7. Limits to validation: Successful validation of a civic | |||
location MUST NOT be required to place an emergency call. | location MUST NOT be required to place an emergency call. | |||
Motivation: In some cases, a civic location may not be considered | Motivation: In some cases, a civic location may not be considered | |||
valid. This fact should not result in the call being dropped or | valid. This fact should not result in the call being dropped or | |||
rejected by any entity along the call setup signaling path to the | rejected by any entity along the call setup signaling path to the | |||
PSAP. | PSAP. | |||
Lo8. 3D sensitive mapping: The mapping protocol MUST implement | Lo8. 3D sensitive mapping: The mapping protocol MUST implement | |||
support for both 2D and 3D location information, and may accept | support for both 2D and 3D location information, and MAY accept | |||
either a 2D or 3D mapping request as input. | either a 2D or 3D mapping request as input. | |||
Motivation: It is expected that queriers may provide either 2D or | Motivation: It is expected that queriers may provide either 2D or | |||
3D data. When a 3D request is presented within an area only | 3D data. When a 3D request is presented within an area only | |||
defined by 2D data within the mapping server, the mapping result | defined by 2D data within the mapping server, the mapping result | |||
would be the same as if the height or altitude coordinate had been | would be the same as if the height or altitude coordinate had been | |||
omitted from the mapping request. | omitted from the mapping request. | |||
Lo9. Database type indicator: The mapping protocol MAY support a | Lo9. Database type indicator: The mapping protocol MAY support a | |||
mechanism which provides an indication describing a specific type | mechanism that provides an indication describing a specific type | |||
of location database used. | of location database used. | |||
Motivation: It is useful to know the source of the data stored in | Motivation: It is useful to know the source of the data stored in | |||
the database used for location validation, either for civic or | the database used for location validation, either for civic or | |||
geographic location matching. In the United States, sources of | geographic location matching. In the United States, sources of | |||
data could include the United States Postal Service, the Master | data could include the United States Postal Service, the Master | |||
Street Address Guide (MSAG) or commercial map data providers. | Street Address Guide (MSAG), or commercial map data providers. | |||
7. Emergency Service Identifier | 7. Emergency Service Identifier | |||
Emergency service identifiers are protocol constants that allow | Emergency service identifiers are protocol constants that allow | |||
protocol entities such as SIP proxy servers to distinguish emergency | protocol entities, such as SIP proxy servers, to distinguish | |||
calls from non-emergency calls and to identify the specific emergency | emergency calls from non-emergency calls and to identify the specific | |||
service desired. Emergency service identifiers are a subclass of | emergency service desired. Emergency service identifiers are a | |||
service identifiers that more generally identify services reachable | subclass of service identifiers that more generally identify services | |||
by callers. An example of a service identifier is the service URN | reachable by callers. An example of a service identifier is the | |||
[I-D.ietf-ecrit-service-urn], but other identifiers, such as tel URIs | service URN [RFC5031], but other identifiers, such as tel URIs | |||
[RFC3966], may also serve this role during a transition period. | [RFC3966], may also serve this role during a transition period. | |||
Since this document only addresses emergency services, we use the | Since this document only addresses emergency services, we use the | |||
terms "emergency service identifier" and "service identifier" | terms "emergency service identifier" and "service identifier" | |||
interchangeably. Requirements for these identifiers include: | interchangeably. Requirements for these identifiers include: | |||
Id1. Multiple emergency services: The mapping protocol MUST be able | Id1. Multiple emergency services: The mapping protocol MUST be able | |||
to distinguish between different emergency services, | to support different emergency services distinguished by different | |||
differentiated by different service identifiers. | service identifiers. | |||
Motivation: Some jurisdictions may offer multiple types of | Motivation: Some jurisdictions may offer multiple types of | |||
emergency services that operate independently and can be contacted | emergency services that operate independently and can be contacted | |||
directly, for example, fire, police and ambulance services. | directly; for example, fire, police, and ambulance services. | |||
Id2. Extensible emergency service identifiers: The mapping protocol | Id2. Extensible emergency service identifiers: The mapping protocol | |||
MUST support an extensible list of emergency identifiers, though | MUST support an extensible list of emergency identifiers, though | |||
it is not required to provide mappings for every possible service. | it is not required to provide mappings for every possible service. | |||
Motivation: Extensibility is required since new emergency services | Motivation: Extensibility is required since new emergency services | |||
may be introduced over time, either globally or in some | may be introduced over time, either globally or in some | |||
jurisdictions. The availability of emergency services depends on | jurisdictions. The availability of emergency services depends on | |||
the locations. For example, the Netherlands are unlikely to offer | the locations. For example, the Netherlands are unlikely to offer | |||
a mountain rescue service. | a mountain rescue service. | |||
skipping to change at page 19, line 37 | skipping to change at page 16, line 12 | |||
support emergency service identifiers to mark a call as an | support emergency service identifiers to mark a call as an | |||
emergency call. | emergency call. | |||
Motivation: Marking ensures proper handling as an emergency call | Motivation: Marking ensures proper handling as an emergency call | |||
by downstream elements that may not recognize, for example, a | by downstream elements that may not recognize, for example, a | |||
local variant of a logical emergency address. This marking | local variant of a logical emergency address. This marking | |||
mechanism is related to, but independent of, marking calls for | mechanism is related to, but independent of, marking calls for | |||
prioritized call handling [RFC4412]. | prioritized call handling [RFC4412]. | |||
Id7. Handling unrecognized emergency service identifiers: There | Id7. Handling unrecognized emergency service identifiers: There | |||
MUST be support for calls which are initiated as emergency calls | MUST be support for calls that are initiated as emergency calls | |||
even if the specific emergency service requested is not recognized | even if the specific emergency service requested is not recognized | |||
by the ESRP. Such calls will then be routed to a generic | by the ESRP. Such calls will then be routed to a generic | |||
emergency service. | emergency service. | |||
Motivation: Fallback routing allows new emergency services to be | Motivation: Fallback routing allows new emergency services to be | |||
introduced incrementally, while avoiding non-routable emergency | introduced incrementally, while avoiding non-routable emergency | |||
calls. For example, a call for marine rescue services would be | calls. For example, a call for marine rescue services would be | |||
routed to a general PSAP if the caller's location does not offer | routed to a general PSAP if the caller's location does not offer | |||
marine rescue services yet. | marine rescue services yet. | |||
Id8. Return fallback service identifier: The mapping protocol must | Id8. Return fallback service identifier: The mapping protocol MUST | |||
be able to report back the actual service mapped if the mapping | be able to report back the actual service mapped if the mapping | |||
protocol substitutes another service for the one requested. | protocol substitutes another service for the one requested. | |||
Motivation: A mapping server may be configured to automatically | Motivation: A mapping server may be configured to automatically | |||
look up the PSAP for another service if the user-requested service | look up the PSAP for another service if the user-requested service | |||
is not available for that location. For example, if there is no | is not available for that location. For example, if there is no | |||
marine rescue service, the mapping protocol might return the PSAP | marine rescue service, the mapping protocol might return the PSAP | |||
URL for general emergencies and include the "urn:service.sos" | URL for general emergencies and include the "urn:service.sos" | |||
identifier in the response to alert the querier to that fact. | identifier in the response to alert the querier to that fact. | |||
Id9. Discovery of visited emergency numbers: There MUST be a | Id9. Discovery of visited emergency numbers: The mapping protocol | |||
mechanism to allow the end device to learn visited emergency | MUST support a mechanism to allow the end device to learn visited | |||
numbers. | emergency numbers. | |||
Motivation: Travelers visiting a foreign country may observe the | Motivation: Travelers visiting a foreign country may observe the | |||
local emergency number, e.g., seeing it painted on the side of a | local emergency number, e.g., seeing it painted on the side of a | |||
fire truck, and then rightfully expect to be able to dial that | fire truck, and then rightfully expect to be able to dial that | |||
emergency number. Similarly, a local "good Samaritan" may use a | emergency number. Similarly, a local "good Samaritan" may use a | |||
tourist's cell phone to summon help. | tourist's cell phone to summon help. | |||
8. Mapping Protocol | 8. Mapping Protocol | |||
There are two basic approaches to invoke the mapping protocol. We | There are two basic approaches to invoke the mapping protocol. We | |||
refer to these as caller-based and mediated. In each case, the | refer to these as caller-based and mediated. In each case, the | |||
mapping client initiates a request to a mapping server via a mapping | mapping client initiates a request to a mapping server via a mapping | |||
protocol. A proposed mapping protocol, LoST, is outlined in | protocol. A proposed mapping protocol, LoST, is outlined in [lost]. | |||
[I-D.hardie-ecrit-lost]. | ||||
For caller-based resolution, the caller's user agent invokes the | For caller-based resolution, the caller's user agent invokes the | |||
mapping protocol to determine the appropriate PSAP based on the | mapping protocol to determine the appropriate PSAP based on the | |||
location provided. The resolution may take place well before the | location provided. The resolution may take place well before the | |||
actual emergency call is placed, or at the time of the call. | actual emergency call is placed, or at the time of the call. | |||
For mediated resolution, an emergency call routing support entity, | For mediated resolution, an emergency call routing support entity, | |||
such as a SIP (outbound) proxy or redirect server invokes the mapping | such as a SIP (outbound) proxy or redirect server, invokes the | |||
service. | mapping service. | |||
Since servers may be used as outbound proxy servers by clients that | Since servers may be used as outbound proxy servers by clients that | |||
are not in the same geographic area as the proxy server, any proxy | are not in the same geographic area as the proxy server, any proxy | |||
server has to be able to translate any caller location to the | server has to be able to translate any caller location to the | |||
appropriate PSAP. (A traveler may, for example, accidentally or | appropriate PSAP. (A traveler may, for example, accidentally or | |||
intentionally configure its home proxy server as its outbound proxy | intentionally configure its home proxy server as its outbound proxy | |||
server, even while far away from home.) | server, even while far away from home.) | |||
Ma1. Baseline query protocol: A mandatory-to-implement protocol | Ma1. Baseline query protocol: A mandatory-to-implement protocol | |||
MUST be specified. | MUST be specified. | |||
Motivation: An over-abundance of similarly-capable choices appears | Motivation: An over-abundance of similarly capable choices appears | |||
undesirable for interoperability. | undesirable for interoperability. | |||
Ma2. Extensible protocol: The mapping protocol MUST be designed to | Ma2. Extensible protocol: The mapping protocol MUST be designed to | |||
support the extensibility of location data elements, both for new | support the extensibility of location data elements, both for new | |||
and existing fields. | and existing fields. | |||
Motivation: This is needed, for example, to accommodate future | Motivation: This is needed, for example, to accommodate future | |||
extensions to location information that might be included in the | extensions-to-location information that might be included in the | |||
PIDF-LO ([RFC4119]). | PIDF-LO ([RFC4119]). | |||
Ma3. Incrementally deployable: The mapping protocol MUST be | Ma3. Incrementally deployable: The mapping protocol MUST be | |||
designed to support its incremental deployment. | designed to support its incremental deployment. | |||
Motivation: It must not be necessary, for example, to have a | Motivation: It must not be necessary, for example, to have a | |||
global street level database before deploying the system. It is | global street level database before deploying the system. It is | |||
acceptable to have some misrouting of calls when the database does | acceptable to have some misrouting of calls when the database does | |||
not (yet) contain accurate PSAP service area information. | not (yet) contain accurate PSAP service area information. | |||
Ma4. Any time mapping: The mapping protocol MUST support the | Ma4. Any time mapping: The mapping protocol MUST support the | |||
ability of the mapping function to be invoked at any time, | ability of the mapping function to be invoked at any time, | |||
including while an emergency call is in process and before an | including while an emergency call is in process and before an | |||
emergency call is initiated. | emergency call is initiated. | |||
Motivation: Used as a fallback mechanism only, if a mapping query | Motivation: If the mapping query fails at call time, it may be | |||
fails at emergency call time, it may be advantageous to have prior | advantageous to be able to fall back to the result of an earlier | |||
knowledge of the PSAP URI. This prior knowledge would be obtained | mapping query. This prior knowledge would be obtained by | |||
by performing a mapping query at any time prior to an emergency | performing a mapping query at any time prior to an emergency call. | |||
call. | ||||
Ma5. Anywhere mapping: The mapping protocol MUST support the | Ma5. Anywhere mapping: The mapping protocol MUST support the | |||
ability to provide mapping information in response to an | ability to provide mapping information in response to an | |||
individual query from any (earthly) location, regardless of where | individual query from any (earthly) location, regardless of where | |||
the mapping client is located, either geographically or by network | the mapping client is located, either geographically or by network | |||
location. | location. | |||
Motivation: The mapping client, such as an ESRP, may not | Motivation: The mapping client, such as an ESRP, may not | |||
necessarily be anywhere close to the caller or the appropriate | necessarily be anywhere close to the caller or the appropriate | |||
PSAP, but must still be able to obtain mapping information. | PSAP, but must still be able to obtain mapping information. | |||
skipping to change at page 22, line 40 | skipping to change at page 18, line 29 | |||
Motivation: Routing to the wrong PSAP will result in delays in | Motivation: Routing to the wrong PSAP will result in delays in | |||
handling emergencies as calls are redirected, and therefore will | handling emergencies as calls are redirected, and therefore will | |||
also result in inefficient use of PSAP resources at the initial | also result in inefficient use of PSAP resources at the initial | |||
point of contact. It is important that the location determination | point of contact. It is important that the location determination | |||
mechanism not be fooled by the location of IP telephony gateways | mechanism not be fooled by the location of IP telephony gateways | |||
or dial-in lines into a corporate LAN (and dispatch emergency help | or dial-in lines into a corporate LAN (and dispatch emergency help | |||
to the gateway or campus, rather than the caller), multi-site LANs | to the gateway or campus, rather than the caller), multi-site LANs | |||
and similar arrangements. | and similar arrangements. | |||
Ma7. Multiple PSAP URIs: The mapping protocol MUST support a method | Ma7. Multiple PSAP URIs: The mapping protocol MUST support a method | |||
to return multiple PSAP URIs which cover the same geographic area. | to return multiple PSAP URIs, which cover the same geographic | |||
area. | ||||
Motivation: Different contact protocols (e.g., PSTN via tel URIs | Motivation: Different contact protocols (e.g., PSTN via tel URIs | |||
and IP via SIP URIs) may be routed to different PSAPs. Less | and IP via SIP URIs) may be routed to different PSAPs. Less | |||
likely, two PSAPs may overlap in their coverage region. | likely, two PSAPs may overlap in their coverage region. | |||
Ma8. Single primary URI per contact protocol: Though the mapping | Ma8. Single primary URI per contact protocol: Though the mapping | |||
protocol may be able to include multiple URIs in the response, it | protocol may be able to include multiple URIs in the response, it | |||
SHOULD return only one primary URI per contact protocol used, so | SHOULD return only one primary URI per contact protocol used, so | |||
that clients are not required to select among different targets | that clients are not required to select among different targets | |||
for the same contact protocol. | for the same contact protocol. | |||
Motivation: There may be two or more URIs returned when multiple | Motivation: There may be two or more URIs returned when multiple | |||
contact protocols are available (e.g., SIP and SMS). The client | contact protocols are available (e.g., SIP and SMS). The client | |||
may select among multiple contact protocols based on its | may select among multiple contact protocols based on its | |||
capabilities, preference settings, or availability. | capabilities, preference settings, or availability. | |||
Ma9. Non-preferred URI schemes: The mapping protocol MAY support | Ma9. Non-preferred URI schemes: The mapping protocol MAY support | |||
the return of a less preferred URI scheme, such as a tel URI. | the return of a less-preferred URI scheme, such as a tel URI. | |||
Motivation: In order to provide incremental support to non-IP | Motivation: In order to provide incremental support to non-IP | |||
PSAPs it may be necessary to be able to complete an emergency call | PSAPs, it may be necessary to be able to complete an emergency | |||
via the PSTN. | call via the PSTN. | |||
Ma10. URI properties: The mapping protocol MUST support the ability | Ma10. URI properties: The mapping protocol MUST support the ability | |||
to provide ancillary information about a contact that allows the | to provide ancillary information about a contact that allows the | |||
mapping client to determine relevant properties of the PSAP URI. | mapping client to determine relevant properties of the PSAP URI. | |||
Motivation: In some cases, the same geographic area is served by | Motivation: In some cases, the same geographic area is served by | |||
several PSAPs, for example, a corporate campus might be served by | several PSAPs; for example, a corporate campus might be served by | |||
both a corporate security department and the municipal PSAP. The | both a corporate security department and the municipal PSAP. The | |||
mapping protocol should then return URIs for both, with | mapping protocol should then return URIs for both, with | |||
information allowing the querying entity to choose one or the | information allowing the querying entity to choose one or the | |||
other. This determination could be made by either an ESRP, based | other. This determination could be made by either an ESRP, based | |||
on local policy, or by direct user choice, in the case of caller- | on local policy, or by direct user choice, in the case of caller- | |||
based methods. | based methods. | |||
Ma11. Mapping referral: The mapping protocol MUST support a | Ma11. Mapping referral: The mapping protocol MUST support a | |||
mechanism for the mapping client to contact any mapping server and | mechanism for the mapping client to contact any mapping server and | |||
be referred to another mapping server that is more qualified to | be referred to another mapping server that is more qualified to | |||
skipping to change at page 24, line 6 | skipping to change at page 19, line 39 | |||
within a single level of a civic location hierarchy. | within a single level of a civic location hierarchy. | |||
Motivation: For example, two mapping servers for the same city or | Motivation: For example, two mapping servers for the same city or | |||
county may handle different streets within that city or county. | county may handle different streets within that city or county. | |||
Ma13. URL for error reporting: The mapping protocol MUST support | Ma13. URL for error reporting: The mapping protocol MUST support | |||
the ability to return a URL that can be used to report a suspected | the ability to return a URL that can be used to report a suspected | |||
or known error within the mapping database. | or known error within the mapping database. | |||
Motivation: If an error is returned, for example, there needs to | Motivation: If an error is returned, for example, there needs to | |||
be a URL which points to a resource which can explain or | be a URL that points to a resource that can explain or potentially | |||
potentially help resolve the error. | help resolve the error. | |||
Ma14. Resilience to mapping server failure: The mapping protocol | Ma14. Resilience to mapping server failure: The mapping protocol | |||
MUST support a mechanism which enables the client to fail over to | MUST support a mechanism that enables the client to fail over to | |||
different (replica) mapping server. | different (replica) mapping server. | |||
Motivation: The failure of a mapping server should not preclude | Motivation: The failure of a mapping server should not preclude | |||
the mapping client from receiving an answer to its query. | the mapping client from receiving an answer to its query. | |||
Ma15. Traceable resolution: The mapping protocol SHOULD support the | Ma15. Traceable resolution: The mapping protocol SHOULD support the | |||
ability of the mapping client to be able to determine the entity | ability of the mapping client to be able to determine the entity | |||
or entities that provided the emergency address resolution | or entities that provided the emergency address resolution | |||
information. | information. | |||
skipping to change at page 25, line 8 | skipping to change at page 20, line 29 | |||
Motivation: This is especially useful when an alternate mapping is | Motivation: This is especially useful when an alternate mapping is | |||
requested, and alternative sources of mapping data may not have | requested, and alternative sources of mapping data may not have | |||
been created or updated with the same set of information or within | been created or updated with the same set of information or within | |||
the same timeframe. Differences in currency between mapping data | the same timeframe. Differences in currency between mapping data | |||
contained within mapping sources should be minimized. | contained within mapping sources should be minimized. | |||
9. Security Considerations | 9. Security Considerations | |||
Threats and security requirements are discussed in a separate | Threats and security requirements are discussed in a separate | |||
document [I-D.ietf-ecrit-security-threats]. | document [RFC5069]. | |||
10. IANA Considerations | ||||
This document does not require actions by the IANA. | ||||
11. Contributors | 10. Contributors | |||
The information in this document is partially derived from text | The information in this document is partially derived from text | |||
written by the following contributors: | written by the following contributors: | |||
Nadine Abbott nabbott@telcordia.com | Nadine Abbott nabbott@telcordia.com | |||
Hideki Arai arai859@oki.com | Hideki Arai arai859@oki.com | |||
Martin Dawson Martin.Dawson@andrew.com | Martin Dawson Martin.Dawson@andrew.com | |||
Motoharu Kawanishi kawanishi381@oki.com | Motoharu Kawanishi kawanishi381@oki.com | |||
Brian Rosen br@brianrosen.net | Brian Rosen br@brianrosen.net | |||
Richard Stastny Richard.Stastny@oefeg.at | Richard Stastny Richard.Stastny@oefeg.at | |||
Martin Thomson Martin.Thomson@andrew.com | Martin Thomson Martin.Thomson@andrew.com | |||
James Winterbottom James.Winterbottom@andrew.com | James Winterbottom James.Winterbottom@andrew.com | |||
12. Acknowledgments | 11. Acknowledgments | |||
In addition to thanking those listed above, we would like to also | In addition to thanking those listed above, we would like to also | |||
thank Guy Caron, Barry Dingle, Keith Drage, Tim Dunn, Patrik | thank Guy Caron, Barry Dingle, Keith Drage, Tim Dunn, Patrik | |||
Faltstrom, Clive D.W. Feather, Raymond Forbes, Randall Gellens, | Faltstrom, Clive D.W. Feather, Raymond Forbes, Randall Gellens, | |||
Michael Haberler, Michael Hammer, Ted Hardie, Gunnar Hellstrom, | Michael Haberler, Michael Hammer, Ted Hardie, Gunnar Hellstrom, | |||
Cullen Jennings, Marc Linsner, Rohan Mahy, Patti McCalmont, Don | Cullen Jennings, Marc Linsner, Rohan Mahy, Patti McCalmont, Don | |||
Mitchell, John Morris, Andrew Newton, Steve Norreys, Jon Peterson, | Mitchell, John Morris, Andrew Newton, Steve Norreys, Jon Peterson, | |||
James Polk, Benny Rodrig, John Rosenberg, Jonathan Rosenberg, John | James Polk, Benny Rodrig, John Rosenberg, Jonathan Rosenberg, John | |||
Schnizlein, Shida Schubert, James Seng, Byron Smith, Barbara Stark, | Schnizlein, Shida Schubert, James Seng, Byron Smith, Barbara Stark, | |||
Richard Stastny, Tom Taylor, Hannes Tschofenig, and Nate Wilcox for | Richard Stastny, Tom Taylor, Hannes Tschofenig, and Nate Wilcox for | |||
their helpful input. | their helpful input. | |||
13. References | 12. References | |||
13.1. Normative References | 12.1. Normative References | |||
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
13.2. Informative References | 12.2. Informative References | |||
[I-D.hardie-ecrit-lost] | ||||
Hardie, T., "LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation | ||||
Protocol", draft-hardie-ecrit-lost-00 (work in progress), | ||||
March 2006. | ||||
[I-D.ietf-ecrit-security-threats] | ||||
Taylor, T., "Security Threats and Requirements for | ||||
Emergency Call Marking and Mapping", | ||||
draft-ietf-ecrit-security-threats-03 (work in progress), | ||||
July 2006. | ||||
[I-D.ietf-ecrit-service-urn] | ||||
Schulzrinne, H., "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for | ||||
Services", draft-ietf-ecrit-service-urn-05 (work in | ||||
progress), August 2006. | ||||
[I-D.ietf-sipping-toip] | ||||
Wijk, A. and G. Gybels, "Framework for real-time text over | ||||
IP using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", | ||||
draft-ietf-sipping-toip-07 (work in progress), | ||||
August 2006. | ||||
[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, | [RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, | |||
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. | A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. | |||
Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, | Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, | |||
June 2002. | June 2002. | |||
[RFC3351] Charlton, N., Gasson, M., Gybels, G., Spanner, M., and A. | [RFC3351] Charlton, N., Gasson, M., Gybels, G., Spanner, M., and A. | |||
van Wijk, "User Requirements for the Session Initiation | van Wijk, "User Requirements for the Session Initiation | |||
Protocol (SIP) in Support of Deaf, Hard of Hearing and | Protocol (SIP) in Support of Deaf, Hard of Hearing and | |||
Speech-impaired Individuals", RFC 3351, August 2002. | Speech-impaired Individuals", RFC 3351, August 2002. | |||
skipping to change at page 31, line 5 | skipping to change at page 22, line 9 | |||
[RFC4103] Hellstrom, G. and P. Jones, "RTP Payload for Text | [RFC4103] Hellstrom, G. and P. Jones, "RTP Payload for Text | |||
Conversation", RFC 4103, June 2005. | Conversation", RFC 4103, June 2005. | |||
[RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object | [RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object | |||
Format", RFC 4119, December 2005. | Format", RFC 4119, December 2005. | |||
[RFC4412] Schulzrinne, H. and J. Polk, "Communications Resource | [RFC4412] Schulzrinne, H. and J. Polk, "Communications Resource | |||
Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", | Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", | |||
RFC 4412, February 2006. | RFC 4412, February 2006. | |||
[RFC5031] Schulzrinne, H., "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for | ||||
Emergency and Other Well-Known Services", RFC 5031, | ||||
January 2008. | ||||
[RFC5069] Taylor, T., Ed., Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and M. | ||||
Shanmugam, "Security Threats and Requirements for | ||||
Emergency Call Marking and Mapping", RFC 5069, | ||||
January 2008. | ||||
[lost] Hardie, T., "LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation | ||||
Protocol", Work in Progress, August 2007. | ||||
[toip] Wijk, A. and G. Gybels, "Framework for real-time text over | ||||
IP using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", Work | ||||
in Progress, August 2006. | ||||
Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
Henning Schulzrinne | Henning Schulzrinne | |||
Columbia University | Columbia University | |||
Department of Computer Science | Department of Computer Science | |||
450 Computer Science Building | 450 Computer Science Building | |||
New York, NY 10027 | New York, NY 10027 | |||
US | US | |||
Phone: +1 212 939 7004 | Phone: +1 212 939 7004 | |||
Email: hgs+ecrit@cs.columbia.edu | EMail: hgs+ecrit@cs.columbia.edu | |||
URI: http://www.cs.columbia.edu | URI: http://www.cs.columbia.edu | |||
Roger Marshall (editor) | Roger Marshall (editor) | |||
TeleCommunication Systems, Inc. | TeleCommunication Systems, Inc. | |||
2401 Elliott Avenue | 2401 Elliott Avenue | |||
2nd Floor | 2nd Floor | |||
Seattle, WA 98121 | Seattle, WA 98121 | |||
US | US | |||
Phone: +1 206 792 2424 | Phone: +1 206 792 2424 | |||
Email: rmarshall@telecomsys.com | EMail: rmarshall@telecomsys.com | |||
URI: http://www.telecomsys.com | URI: http://www.telecomsys.com | |||
Full Copyright Statement | Full Copyright Statement | |||
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). | Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008). | |||
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions | This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions | |||
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors | contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors | |||
retain all their rights. | retain all their rights. | |||
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an | This document and the information contained herein are provided on an | |||
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS | "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS | |||
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND | OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND | |||
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS | THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS | |||
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF | OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF | |||
skipping to change at page 32, line 44 | skipping to change at line 1060 | |||
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of | attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of | |||
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this | such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this | |||
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at | specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at | |||
http://www.ietf.org/ipr. | http://www.ietf.org/ipr. | |||
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any | The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any | |||
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary | copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary | |||
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement | rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement | |||
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at | this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at | |||
ietf-ipr@ietf.org. | ietf-ipr@ietf.org. | |||
Acknowledgment | ||||
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF | ||||
Administrative Support Activity (IASA). | ||||
End of changes. 78 change blocks. | ||||
205 lines changed or deleted | 171 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ |