Subject: Re: [Sipping] Re: Comments on revised 'sos' draft

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 15:11:06 EST

In a message dated 12/21/2002 12:06:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> That's why I argued that incorporating all local numbers is not feasible 
> nor desirable. I'm still undecided whether favoring 112 or 911 is a good 
> idea (I suspect it may not be since it's hard to draw the line).
> 

[MAP] I think there is still confusion here. Of course, a device can not 
"incorporate" all local numbers. My comment was that it must "handle" all 
local numbers (where the primary discussion at the moment is regarding 
emergency numbers). If this is claiming to lead to an "international 
standard", then it can not "favor" 112 or 911. While "SOS" itself could be a 
good idea, perhaps the discussion and draft should be separated from the more 
general, complex issue of recognition by a terminal of the local dial plan. 
Maybe just a statement to the effect that "besides handling the "SOS" as 
defined in this note, a terminal must correctly handle the local dial plan, 
including the appropriate emergency number(s), which is not described here".

Mike Pierce
Artel

---

From: Michael Hammer <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 17:00:20 -0500

Mike,

Before a "terminal" can handle the local dial plan, it must first determine 
what "local" is.  It is still not clear to me how that is going to occur.

The terminal may be able to handle a number input by the end-user and 
formulate a request, but then it may need to rely on a nearby proxy which 
is more fixed and knowledgeable of what local is and route 
accordingly.  But, this may depend on the topology of the network and its 
relationship to geography and jurisdictional boundaries.

Mike

At 03:11 PM 12/23/2002 -0500, [email-masked] wrote:
>standard", then it can not "favor" 112 or 911. While "SOS" itself could be 
>a good idea, perhaps the discussion and draft should be separated from the 
>more general, complex issue of recognition by a terminal of the local dial 
>plan. Maybe just a statement to the effect that "besides handling the 
>"SOS" as defined in this note, a terminal must correctly handle the local 
>dial plan, including the appropriate emergency number(s), which is not 
>described here".
>
>Mike Pierce
>Artel

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP