Subject: Re: [speermint] minimum set of requirements for SIP-basedVoIPinterconnection and emergency calling

From: "Stastny Richard" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:07:39 +0200

Sorry, but I doubt that emergency services is within the scope of speermint
 
For emergency services normally either the UA itself or the first hop proxy is responsible,
so it never reaches the peering point at all
 
-sta

________________________________

Von: Bob Natale [mailto:[email-masked]]
Gesendet: Fr 16.06.2006 00:41
An: Jean-Francois Mule
Cc: [email-masked]
Betreff: RE: [speermint] minimum set of requirements for SIP-basedVoIPinterconnection and emergency calling

Hi Jean-Francois,

I agree with your general position on this and the first three of your
five bullet-list items.

(I don't know enough about the location conveyance I-D to have a
position and I'll wait on the etc item :)

We should probably do a close scrub of the latest ECRIT requirements doc
to ensure coverage and adopt appropriate terminology where applicable.

Cheers,
BobN

-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Francois Mule [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 6:34 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [speermint] minimum set of requirements for SIP-based
VoIPinterconnection and emergency calling

Should the special case of emergency calls be considered as part of the
use cases for the 'minimum' set of requirements for SIP-based VoIP
interconnection?

If so, what should the minimum set of requirements be for SIP voice
interconnects?

Unless this is done somewhere else in the context of voice
interconnects, I think it should be in scope given the definition of VSP
in the speermint terminology draft and the real use cases of VSPs
handing off 911 calls to other service provider or terminating calls to
911 psaps.

That said, those requirements should probably be left at the SIP level
and remain at a high-level given the work in sipping, ecrit and various
national bodies.
E.g.
        - a VSP should be able to recognize the SOS URN or any other
well known markers such as a local dialing string for emergency calls as
an emergency session
        - a VSP should invoke special SIP routing procedures to hand the
call off to the correct PSAP
        - put SIP Priority header
        - support SIP location conveyance I-D?
        - etc.

Any thoughts and comments are appreciated.

Jean-Francois.
email: [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Speermint mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/speermint

_______________________________________________
Speermint mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/speermint

_______________________________________________
Speermint mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/speermint

---

From: Andrew Newton <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 09:35:05 -0400

> Sorry, but I doubt that emergency services is within the scope of speermint

I can't speak to this statement because I'm completely confused about 
the purpose of the working being conducted in this working group.

> so it never reaches the peering point at all

But can you explain to me how you reached this conclusion?  Do you 
expect UAs to directly connect to PSAP SIP servers?  Are you ruling out 
a peering point because the ECRIT process results in a SIP URI and not a 
telephone number, and therefore a peering point won't be consulted?  I 
don't get it.

-andy