Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data-11: Question on scope of the Contact URI, defined in section 3.1.5

[Randall Gellens <[e-mail]>]

Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data-11: Question

Do we really need to say MUST NOT?  Would it be sufficient to describe why the URL is not appropriate?  E.g., "Note that this contact information is not intended for nor is it suitable for a callback by a PSAP...."

At 6:43 PM +0000 10/22/13, Christer Holmberg wrote:

Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
     boundary="_000_7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C4EBC2BESESSMB209erics_"

Hi,

 

I would suggest that the contact information MUST NOT be used by the PSAP for callbacks, and also say that the reason is because the contact information may not be associated with the user or the device that made the emergency call. No need to mention the Priority header field, simply refer to the psap-callback draft.

 

Something like:

 

    "Note that this contact information MUST NOT be used by PSAPs for callbacks,

    as described in [I-D.ietf-ecrit-psap-callback], as the contact information might

    not be associated with the user or device that made the emergency call."

 

Regards,

 

Christer

 

 

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig [[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, 22 October 2013 6:45 PM
To: Roger Marshall; Christer Holmberg; Brian Rosen
Cc: ecrit_ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data-11: Question on scope of the Contact URI, defined in section 3.1.5

Hi Christer,

as discussed in this email thread I added text for clarification:

----

3.1.5.  Data Provider Contact URI

    Data Element:  Data Provider Contact URI

    Use:  Required

    XML Element:  <ContactURI>

    Description:  When provided by a service provider or an access
       provider, this information MUST be a URI to a 24/7 support
       organization tasked to provide PSAP support for this emergency
       call.  If the call is from a device, this would reflect the
       contact information of the owner of the device.  If a telephone
       number is the contact address then it MUST be tel URI.  If it is
       provided as a SIP URI then it MUST be in the form of
       sip:telephonenumber@serviceprovider:user=phone.  Note that this
       contact information is not used by PSAPs for callbacks using a SIP
       Priority header field with the value set to "psap- callback", as
       described in [I-D.ietf-ecrit-psap-callback].
       
       
----


Do you think that I managed to capture your concern?

Ciao
Hannes


On 08/26/2013 10:33 PM, Roger Marshall wrote:
> I agree with ChristerÕs suggestion to add caution text.
>
> -roger.
>
> *From:*[e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf
> Of *Christer Holmberg
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 08, 2013 9:44 PM
> *To:* Brian Rosen
> *Cc:* ecrit_ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data-11: Question on
> scope of the Contact URI, defined in section 3.1.5
>
> Hi,
>
> If the PSAP is not supposed to use the field when/if making a callback,
> I think we shall explicitly state that in the document, and/or in
> general say that the field must not be used for calls that are expected
> to be given priority/special handling, and give callback as an example.
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
>
>
> Sent from */Windows/* using *TouchDown*(www.nitrodesk.com
> <http://www.nitrodesk.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.nitrodesk.com>)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Brian Rosen [[e-mail]]
> *To:* Christer Holmberg [[e-mail]]
> *CC:* ecrit_ietf.org [[e-mail]]
> *Subject:* Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data-11: Question on
> scope of the Contact URI, defined in section 3.1.5
>
> The Contact is how the PSAP contacts the service provider to get help

> from the SP.
>
> It's not a "call back" in the sense of an emergency call (the network
> doesn't treat it differently than a normal call), at least as far as I
> have considered it.  I suppose it might be nice to know that it's
> important, but I don't think that is worth any big new mechanism.
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> On Thursday, August 8, 2013, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>
> I haven't seen any reply to this. Brian, do you have any opinion?
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
>
>
> Sent from */Windows/* using *TouchDown* (www.nitrodesk.com
> <http://www.nitrodesk.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.nitrodesk.com>)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Christer Holmberg [[e-mail]]
> *To:* [e-mail] [[e-mail]]
> *Subject:* [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data-11: Question on
> scope of the Contact URI, defined in section 3.1.5
>
> Hi,
>
> A question on the scope of the Contact URI, defined in section 3.1.5 of
> draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data-11.txt.
>
> Is the Contact URI supposed by the PSAP when making callbacks?
>
> If the value represents a Òservice providerÓ, should PSAP callbacks also
> be made to the service provider?
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this message may be
> privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
> or responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient,
> any review, forwarding, dissemination, distribution or copying of this
> communication or any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately,
> and delete it and all attachments from your computer and network.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit" rel="nofollow">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
>

_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit

-- 

Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
Blessed are the meek for they shall inhibit the earth.