Re: [Ecrit] Expert Reviewer's response to request to register 'country-specific' in 'sos' Subservice Registry in the Service URN Labels group

[Dan Banks <[e-mail]>]

I generally agree with Brian so far in this discussion in that the barrier to registration should be low (RFC 7163 lowered it from what it was) and the proposed registration is not well aligned with the way the service names are intended to be defined and used.   This is further reinforced by the suggestion that the proposed registration is “3GPP networks only and not to be intended to be used everywhere.”  To me, that calls into question whether the urn:service prefix should be used at all.

I do have one specific issue with what Brian is suggesting below, however – the service name syntax does not allow periods in a top level service name (for good reason).

Aside from that, I do see potential value in defining subservices under .police.  I would lean toward borrowing the “a” levels for indicating police services by the level of government under which they function, as these seem sufficiently broad and reusable.  It may also make sense to separately have subservices to indicate police for specific concerns (drugs, traffic, etc.).  I think all of these could co-exist under .police because they describe different things, even though the answers may overlap.

Dan Banks

From: Ecrit [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Brian Rosen
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 8:43 PM
To: Ivo Sedlacek
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Expert Reviewer's response to request to register 'country-specific' in 'sos' Subservice Registry in the Service URN Labels group

Ivo, I apologize for not making sure this request was not ultimately concluded satisfactorily.

I would like to ask the work group for advice for police, and I will do the work to make registrations simple.

We can use the “a” levels, or we can create a sub registry for .police.  Either requires a standards track document to create a sub registry.  Alternatively, we could just allow a period in a name and register “police.municipal” or “police.a2” as top level registrations in a registration.

Let’s first decide which way: .police.a2 or .police.municipal

The  former is more regular and handles political subdivision easily.  However, there are police forces which don’t fit this pattern.  US has “Federal Marshals” and “FBI” and “Secret Service” although some of them don’t have emergency numbers.

My suggestion is to create the sub registry for police, have the “a” levels as initial values, and allow additional values to be added with expert review.

I am not aware of similar issues with fire or emergency medical.  There are many countries which have multiple medical services but AFAIK only one emergency number that is used for emergency medical.  If there are some isolated instances, I’d allow a random sub service (urn:service:sos.medical.mountain) registration.

I do think that if we don’t allow “country-specific” then we are obligated to make handling these kinds of requests straightforward.

Brian


On Nov 16, 2016, at 10:17 AM, Ivo Sedlacek <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Hello,

> Since the management policy of the emergency service is “expert review”, the barrier to adding new, possibly experimental services is low,
> and the consequences of having services that are not eventually deployed persisting in the registry is minimal.

I tried to register emergency URNs
- for emergency service of municipal police; and
- for emergency service of national police
(both of which are used in Czech republic) with IANA in https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit/current/msg08419.html

The registration was rejected ....

So, I disagree that barrieer is low.

Kind regards

Ivo Sedlacek

From: Ecrit [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:08 PM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] Expert Reviewer's response to request to register 'country-specific' in 'sos' Subservice Registry in the Service URN Labels group

Hi Brian,
the aimed registration is for 3GPP networks only and not to be intended to be used everywhere.

So from my understanding there are a many of existing specific emergency services out in the world which need the equivalent within the 3GPP IMS world.

An example is Poland:
Please see http://uke.gov.pl/tablice-numerow-kierowania-alarmowego-nka-9410 which lists the number 986 for "straż miejska" (= municipal police) and the number 997 for Policja (= police) as "numery alarmowe" (= emergency numbers).
Which cannot use the normal sos urn.

3GPP had the requirement to specify this for the 3GPP IMS world. And the easiest way was to have such an mechanism.
Since this is only used for the 3GPP IMS world, 3GPP would like to have a mechanism to allow these  specific suptypes.

So what could be done to get such an solution where IETF can agree upon?

Best Regards

Roland

Von: Ecrit [mailto:[e-mail]] Im Auftrag von Brian Rosen
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. November 2016 15:54
An: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Cc: ECRIT
Betreff: [Ecrit] Expert Reviewer's response to request to register 'country-specific' in 'sos' Subservice Registry in the Service URN Labels group

I am the expert reviewer designated by the ecrit working group for this request.

I believe this request is not consistent with the words and the intent of the registry.  “country-specific’ is not an emergency service.  Since the management policy of the emergency service is “expert review”, the barrier to adding new, possibly experimental services is low, and the consequences of having services that are not eventually deployed persisting in the registry is minimal.  The URN was not intended to have a generic X- service or equivalent, which is what this registration attempts to do.  New services, even experimental services, should register the service with IANA following the normal procedure.

Therefore, I recommend that we deny this request and suggest that the specific services be registered with IANA as they are deployed.  This decision has been reviewed with the ecrit working group.

Brian

On Nov 3, 2016, at 3:59 PM, Az Mankin <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

ECRIT Working Group,
We need a volunteer for the following IANA Expert Review request that Amanda Baber of IANA just sent to Roger and me.  It needs to be written and sent to the mailing list, per the IESG's appointment of the WG as the Expert Reviewer (http://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-serviceid-labels/urn-serviceid-labels.xhtml)  Amanda's message is under the line. Who'd like to step up for this?
Thanks!  from your Chairs
----------------

The IANA Services Operator has received a request for registration in the 'sos' Sub-Services registry in the Service URN Labels group. This request comes from Frederic Firmin of ETSI.

According to RFC 7163, registration in 'sos' Sub-Services requires expert review as designated by the ECRIT working group or its successor (or, in their absence, the IESG). Can you send this request for review?

The IESG has asked that expert reviews be completed within two weeks, if possible.

See below.

thanks,

Amanda Baber
Lead IANA Services Specialist
PTI

===

Contact Name:
Frederic Firmin

Contact Email:
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

Type of Assignment:
sub-service URN

Registry:
Service URN Labels registry with the "sos" URN Service Labels subregistry.

Description:
This sub-service type is used before an appropriate sub-service type is registered with IANA for a specific emergency service. This sub-service type is not used where an appropriate sub-service type has been registered with IANA for the specific emergency service.
The next level of sub-services indicates the country where the specific emergency service is used. Subtypes below this are defined by national regulation of that country and are not registered with IANA.


Additional Info:
The following service URN is proposed to be registered:
urn:service:sos.country-specific

reference: 24.229 12.14.0 available at http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/24_series/24.229/24229-ce0.zip (cf subclause 7.11.1)
_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit