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

Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> Tue, 22 October 2013 15:45 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B030211E846A for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:45:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.623
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.623 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.024, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZwM9QAxOEfKN for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:45:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 771D111E83E9 for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:45:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.254.200] ([80.92.115.161]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MHso5-1Va0W10lDh-003eR4 for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 17:45:00 +0200
Message-ID: <52669D95.8030501@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 17:45:25 +0200
From: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Roger Marshall <RMarshall@telecomsys.com>, 'Christer Holmberg' <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, Brian Rosen <br@brianrosen.net>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C41E812@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C422BC7@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>, <CAOPrzE3XQGhXgH_zPpNDeLBrPb4hRUp2JefV2s9TqW1Ku0=RSA@mail.gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1C422DB7@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <FBD5AAFFD0978846BF6D3FAB4C892ACC3EDF01@SEA-EXMB-1.telecomsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <FBD5AAFFD0978846BF6D3FAB4C892ACC3EDF01@SEA-EXMB-1.telecomsys.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:uWdcfq7B3xV/5psNyH3PZ8GKPfEK9FpVEeIFzaucW9q3LvpZtij kP5I8RZUEOvCTTsw9jydXxQ1w0TGoVwhzlKuP1JyRt9bbjUCNxReNjCpFvADK09nt+pib8w /2CfBSFyVPTcxWtb6dB7QfeHakaq75MOPJ5wCR742HZQhgYrZ5Hcr1ixZNenQ61JlRLWP3f Xahf7W39loxZB3AMrHNJA==
Cc: "ecrit_ietf.org" <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
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 15:45:07 -0000

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 Christer’s suggestion to add caution text.
>
> -roger.
>
> *From:*ecrit-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ecrit-bounces@ietf.org] *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>)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Brian Rosen [br@brianrosen.net]
> *To:* Christer Holmberg [christer.holmberg@ericsson.com]
> *CC:* ecrit_ietf.org [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
>
> 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>)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Christer Holmberg [christer.holmberg@ericsson.com]
> *To:* ecrit@ietf.org [ecrit@ietf.org]
> *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 “service provider”, 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
> Ecrit@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
>