Re: [rtcweb] Possible New Cases

Scratching my head why you did not even mention the SOS URL,
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5031.txt

> Please note these are treated differently today in current networks and I
> would suggest we aim to preserve the capabilities - subject to discussion in
> the community, in the right WG - eg ECRIT. These are, using legacy terminology
> ...

Subject to discussion in yet another WG?

Henry

On 7/30/11 6:03 AM, "Paul Beaumont" <paulbeaumont.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> This was mentioned is the initial RTCWeb session at IETF 81 but just to make
> sure it has been captured and understood.
> 
> (1) Please can a separate use case be added for an Emergency Services
> telephony call (eg 999 in UK, 112 in EU, 911 in NA, etc).
> 
> (2) Please can a further separate use case be added for an Emergency Services
> real time text (eg 18000 in UK, via TextDirect operator to ES operator for
> hearing impaired persons). FYI today this is a low speed in-band voice band
> data call on the text leg. Presumably the replacement would be some kind of
> Presence/Messaging replacement with assured delivery or similar.
> 
> Please note these are treated differently today in current networks and I
> would suggest we aim to preserve the capabilities - subject to discussion in
> the community, in the right WG - eg ECRIT. These are, using legacy terminology
> ...
> 
> A). Prioritisation in processing of Emergency Services calls above Ordinary
> Calls, particularly when server in overload.
> 
> B). Marking of Emergency Services calls to a specific A-/Calling Party
> Category to allow them to be identified downstream.
> 
> C). Release control modified to B-/Called Party Control with changed RTCWeb
> browser client behaviour along with indication as to "Off Hook" and "On Hook".
> 
> Paul
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

Re: [rtcweb] Possible New Cases - Emergency Services Call & Text