RE: [Sipping-emergency] proposed charter, new wg on emergency calling and routing

["Brian Rosen" <[e-mail]>]

Aha!

I've been calling it an AIP=Access Infrastructure Provider, i.e. the service
provider that has the "last mile" infrastructure and thus normally knows
where you are.

Brian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 4:19 PM
> To: Brian Rosen; Marc Linsner; [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: [Sipping-emergency] proposed charter,new wg on emergency
> calling and routing
> 
> IAP - Infrastructure Access Provider - whomever is aware of a) the
> physical location of the end user and b) provides Internet access to the
> end user.
> 
> Your second question introduces the notion of default call routing - this
> is important to consider as well, not onlyfor  this reason but also  for
> other process failures that may occur. How this information gets to the
> end device - whether it is pre-determined and statically entered or,
> assigned at a lower level than the IAP  - I don't know - maybe both?
> 
> Nate Wilcox
> 
> 	-----Original Message-----
> 	From: Brian Rosen [mailto:[e-mail]]
> 	Sent: Mon 9/27/2004 3:46 PM
> 	To: [e-mail]; 'Marc Linsner'; sipping-
> [e-mail]
> 	Cc:
> 	Subject: RE: [Sipping-emergency] proposed charter,new wg on
> emergency calling and routing
> 
> 
> 
> 	What's an IAP?
> 
> 	Agree, you send the call, validated or not.
> 
> 	Of course if the validation fails, where do you send the call?
> 
> 	Brian
> 
> 	> -----Original Message-----
> 	> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]
> 	> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 3:45 PM
> 	> To: Brian Rosen; Marc Linsner; [e-mail]
> 	> Subject: RE: [Sipping-emergency] proposed charter,new wg on
> emergency
> 	> calling and routing
> 	>
> 	> While validation is important as described by both of you, this
> should in
> 	> no way intefere with the processing of a call to an ERC. Feedback
> should
> 	> be provided to the end user or IAP if the location information  is
> out of
> 	> acceptable parameters (e.g. out of street range, wrong spelling
> etc.) and
> 	> also provided to an ERC or ERC service provider as a method to
> ensure that
> 	> the erroneous information is corrected BEFORE an emergency call is
> ever
> 	> placed. However, the ability for that particular device to place
> an
> 	> emergency call should not be restricted by this process (didn't
> see it
> 	> anywhere in the proposal but I wanted to make sure that it is
> stated) -
> 	> this mirrors the current process of validation here in North
> America for
> 	> PSTN originated calls.
> 	>
> 	> Nate Wilcox
> 	>
> 	> -----Original Message-----
> 	> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:[e-mail]]
> 	> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 3:20 PM
> 	> To: 'Marc Linsner'; [e-mail]
> 	> Subject: RE: [Sipping-emergency] proposed charter,new wg on
> emergency
> 	> calling and routing
> 	>
> 	>
> 	> Agreed that you COULD change the way the system works now to have
> a
> 	> translation from postal address to dispatch address.  They don't
> do that
> 	> now, but they could.  In that regard, maybe a bad example.  If you
> were to
> 	> propose that the system have a translation, then some kind of spec
> would
> 	> have to be written that said that, which might be a new
> deliverable.
> 	>
> 	> Misspellings, missing or extra directionals (North, Southwest,
> ..),
> 	> confusion between Main Street and Main Drive, etc. are better
> examples.
> 	> The point is to make sure that the call will be routed correctly,
> 	> and responders will be dispatched correctly BEFORE the location is
> needed
> 	> to
> 	> do so, and the only way we know how to do that is to compare the
> address
> 	> against some kind of master list.
> 	>
> 	> Brian
> 	>
> 	> > -----Original Message-----
> 	> > From: Marc Linsner [mailto:[e-mail]]
> 	> > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 3:09 PM
> 	> > To: 'Brian Rosen'; [e-mail]
> 	> > Subject: RE: [Sipping-emergency] proposed charter,new wg on
> emergency
> 	> > calling and routing
> 	> >
> 	> > In-line.....
> 	> >
> 	> > > -----Original Message-----
> 	> > > From: [e-mail]
> 	> > > [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Brian
> Rosen
> 	> > > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 12:04 PM
> 	> > > To: 'James M. Polk'; 'Peterson, Jon'; sipping-
> [e-mail]
> 	> > > Cc: [e-mail]
> 	> > > Subject: RE: [Sipping-emergency] proposed charter,new wg on
> 	> > > emergency calling and routing
> 	> > > Importance: Low
> 	> > >
> 	> > >
> 	> > > When you place an emergency call, the location is used to
> 	> > > determine where to send the call, and it is used to dispatch
> 	> > > responders.  If the location you supply does not match
> 	> > > anything the call center recognizes, the wrong thing may
> 	> > > happen.  What you want to do is to compare the address you
> 	> > > have against a list maintained by the emergency response
> 	> > > system to make sure they know where that is.
> 	> > >
> 	> > > An example is illustrative.  If you ask me my home address,
> 	> > > I'd tell you that it is 470 Conrad Drive, Mars, PA.  However,
> 	> > > that is NOT the address that should be used to determine
> 	> > > where to send an emergency call from my home.  That is
> 	> > > because the post office boundary is not the same as the
> 	> > > emergency call system boundary.
> 	> >
> 	> > So?  As long as '470 Conrad Drive, Mars, PA.' is unique, modern
> data
> 	> > processing can handle it.
> 	> >
> 	> > If you were to determine the
> 	> > > serving ERC without validation, you would send my emergency
> 	> > > call to the Butler County ERC, which serves Mars, rather than
> 	> > > to the NEWCOM center that serves Pine Township, where I live.
> 	> >
> 	> > Validation and routing are 2 separate issues.  If in fact, 470
> 	> > Conrad.....,
> 	> > is a good address, the routing function (which will be based on
> data
> 	> from
> 	> > the ERC entities) better get it right and send the call the
> NEWCOM
> 	> center
> 	> > as
> 	> > you describe.  All that validation *may* offer is to verify that
> you
> 	> (the
> 	> > end-user) didn't spell Conrad as Conard (or put Street instead
> of Drive,
> 	> > etc.)!  I realize there are locales that utilize a different
> 'location'
> 	> > address for emergency purposes than the postal address, but the
> IETF
> 	> can't
> 	> > fix this.
> 	> >
> 	> > I'm not against validation, but your example isn't the real
> reason for
> 	> > validation.
> 	> >
> 	> > >
> 	> > [snip]
> 	> >
> 	> > -Marc Linsner-
> 	> >
> 	> >
> 	>
> 	>
> 	>
> 	>
> 	> _______________________________________________
> 	> 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
> 
> 
> 




_______________________________________________
Sipping-emergency mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping-emergency