RE: [Sipping-emergency] Re: Emergency-req: 8-12

["King, Kimberly S." <[e-mail]>]

All,

I am sorry about being so clueless in this area but Allison's words ring
true. 

Maybe I can use my lack of knowledge to help.  Ultimately, what is it that
is required that the current SIP lacks (SIPPING should answer later)?  To
get there, name what is required (this work).

I'm getting lost in what is the context.  It looks to me like there are
three cases.

a) someone uses IP-based phone or IM to call for help (sos/911) and this
hits a gateway (either regular IP-PSTN gateway or IP to text messaging
(e.g., SMS).  What is required in this case?
b) someone uses IP-based phone or IM to call for help (sos/911) and this
goes end-to-end IP.  (It appears to me that it might not be detectable to
the caller whether a gateway will intervene so perhaps what is required
should be the same as case a).)
c) the receiving center is IP-based but calls come in from the PSTN.

Have I got this correct?

Now, if so, isn't this simple?  What is needed?  location information?
time-stamps? some assuredness that the message is authentic?  ?

When I try to read the draft, I don't get it in clear language what is
needed but my feelings are that it shouldn't be that complicated.  What am I
missing?


Kimberly

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Allison Mankin [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 11:53 PM
>To: Henning Schulzrinne
>Cc: James M. Polk; [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [Sipping-emergency] Re: Emergency-req: 8-12 
>
>
>Henning,
>
> Since this is a requirements document, I'm trying to
> exhaustively list all possible options, not pick favorites.
>
>A requirements document should be more generic.  There's 
>almost a sense that you and James are writing an quasi-RFP
>for US and European centers.  Your words give the sense of 
>avoiding "the" solution by giving ranges of them.
>
>The goal should be to give the problem with some clarity to
>SIPPING so that the group can determine 1. if it's a necessary
>one for the WG.  2. if it's one that can be done with existing 
>SIP capabilities and whether they have issues such as security
>strengths that might need modifications (a number of times SIPPING
>has found that the feature was fine, but it needed some normative
>modification).  3.  if not, what requirements there are for new
>SIP capabilities.  I see far less generic material in the current
>draft.
>
>I too am working to deadlines this weekend, so this comment must
>be brief, but I have a real concern for what we will see from
>this draft.
>
>Allison
>_______________________________________________
>Sipping-emergency mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-emergency
>
_______________________________________________
Sipping-emergency mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-emergency