[Ecrit] Discussion on draft-winterbottom-ecrit-priv-loc-04

"Marc Linsner (mlinsner)" <mlinsner@cisco.com> Wed, 20 August 2014 11:35 UTC

Return-Path: <mlinsner@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFCC71A0242 for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 04:35:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -13.269
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.269 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cazo258n1a6a for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 04:35:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8322F1A020A for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 04:35:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3820; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1408534507; x=1409744107; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=26wYgmBCrFiU5TwHS5kW9+0MkDC5Egend+aA/8fuAOE=; b=UjCG2NRZMBgjUrz34gYTq2rnjR6f77KziG1h2FcKbYGImfcuuPJKx3y1 8oR0oHeONQz0QpWyrP24qflPfNrpoGhW6FVNxf89Wt10bqlkFDkoG1Fa1 uZHzYQnlvLqwJYwFn0VXkqtTFJsHxYZMuBrDu2A4ckTNXTe2chKKgznsr A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhIFAMSG9FOtJA2F/2dsb2JhbABZgkdGgS7VMhZ3hAqBCwEMDmYXEASIVZ0MpH0XlB8FkSWLHZUHg12CNIEHAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,901,1400025600"; d="scan'208,217";a="345815158"
Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Aug 2014 11:35:06 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com [173.37.183.88]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7KBZ537020254 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 11:35:05 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x08.cisco.com ([169.254.8.110]) by xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([173.37.183.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 06:35:05 -0500
From: "Marc Linsner (mlinsner)" <mlinsner@cisco.com>
To: "ecrit@ietf.org" <ecrit@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Discussion on draft-winterbottom-ecrit-priv-loc-04
Thread-Index: AQHPvGrJO0XY0onbtUWa7++7+H3FdQ==
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 11:35:05 +0000
Message-ID: <D01A0027.5E9F0%mlinsner@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.82.214.27]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D01A00275E9F0mlinsnerciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ecrit/uSBQAnt3AWzXvvh3QyaqBDonKP0
Subject: [Ecrit] Discussion on draft-winterbottom-ecrit-priv-loc-04
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 11:35:08 -0000

All,

Thanks to all who commented on this draft, it appears we have rough consensus to move forward.  During the discussion on the work, it’s been pointed out that while this is a departure from the ECRIT architecture for emergency calling, we should support it as ETSI will use it in their emergency calling architecture.  Since the ETSI emergency calling architecture is unknown by ECRIT, the chairs are exploring ways to liaise with ETSI so we have a better understanding of their requirements and architecture.

Hence, the chairs would like to send the following as an informal liaison to the chair(s) of the ETSI E2NA working group.  Please respond by COB 8/25/14 if you believe this would be helpful as we work on this item.

"The IETF ECRIT working group has agreed to take on a work item to extend the HELD protocol to support PSAP URI information in the response to a location request.  This feature is currently not supported in the HELD protocol as it’s not required in the ECRIT emergency calling architecture.  Therefore, the ECRIT working group would like to better understand the requirements of E2NA work that is driving this request.  Would it be possible to exchange architectural features and requirements such that we can better understand the usage of this proposed work item?"

Thanks,

Marc Linsner
Roger Marshall
Co-Chairs of IETF ECRIT Working Group