Re: [rtcweb] RTCWEB and emergency services

[Randell Jesup <[e-mail]>]

On 9/28/2011 3:00 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> I'm waiting for the draft to read in context, but what I hear Bernard 
> saying is:
>
> "IF the RTCweb service falls within the scope of 911 regulations
> THEN here are some things it needs to consider...."
>
> Some RTCWeb services will certainly not fall within the scope of 911 
> regulations.
> If someone creates a service where it does matter (sets out to emulate 
> a phone perfectly in the browser, for instance) they may very well 
> find themselves in a situation where they do become subject to 
> regulation, and in that case, the implementor may have benefit from 
> reading Bernard's draft (or the document that eventually results from it).
>
> All other service implementors can disregard it.
>
> I hope....

I hope too.  I'll note that in the US the FCC has a history of changing 
the rules on 911 compliance (and other legal requirements like intercept 
(CALEA)).

VoIP was originally excluded; then it was included only for calls to the 
PSTN, then it was included for all calls if your "network" was attached 
to the PSTN (even if the call was totally on-net).  (This refers to 
CALEA.)  There's even been talk of extending it to non-PSTN-connected 
networks like XBox Live.

So I wouldn't assume that there won't (now or in the future) be a 
requirement for application developers to support either 911 or CALEA 
(in the US) or the equivalent in other countries.  And the requirement 
already exists for anyone who wants to connect an WebRTC client to the 
PSTN in the US.

As far as *we're* concerned, I think it just means we should make sure 
some basic functionalities are available to the applications so *they* 
can comply - and I think that's what Bernard is addressing.


For example, see
http://paranoia.dubfire.net/2011/02/deconstructing-calea-hearing.html
(Good article, BTW)

    Voice services that do not connect to the public telephone network.
    Google and Facebook both offer in-network audio chat to their users
    (Google also offers video). Microsoft's XBox 360 service, Blizzard
    and several other online video game platforms allow users to insult
    each other chat while they play against other users online. At least
    from published information, I'm not aware of any one of these
    companies offering interception capabilities -- and so law
    enforcement agencies almost certainly want access to this

I'll also note that browser<->browser WebRTC communication currently 
won't be covered by the CALEA requirement-to-decrypt even if the service 
provider's network attaches to the PSTN because (if we're using DTLS) 
the keys aren't known to the provider (or the app).

-- 
Randell Jesup
[e-mail]