[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits] [IPR]

Versions: (draft-rosen-ecrit-framework) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 RFC 6443

ecrit                                                           B. Rosen
Internet-Draft                                                   NeuStar
Intended status: Standards Track                          H. Schulzrinne
Expires: May 22, 2008                                        Columbia U.
                                                                 J. Polk
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                               A. Newton
                                                       November 19, 2007

       Framework for Emergency Calling using Internet Multimedia

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 22, 2008.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).


   The IETF has several efforts targeted at standardizing various
   aspects of placing emergency calls.  This document describes how all
   of those component parts are used to support emergency calls from

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 1]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   citizens and visitors to authorities.

Table of Contents

   1.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Overview of how emergency calls are placed . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.  Which devices and services should support  emergency calls . . 10
   5.  Identifying an emergency call  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   6.  Location and its role in an emergency call . . . . . . . . . . 13
     6.1.  Types of location information  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
     6.2.  Location Determination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
       6.2.1.  User-entered location information  . . . . . . . . . . 16
       6.2.2.  Access network "wire database" location information  . 17
       6.2.3.  End-system measured location information . . . . . . . 17
       6.2.4.  Network measured location information  . . . . . . . . 18
     6.3.  Who adds location, endpoint or proxy . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     6.4.  Location and references to location  . . . . . . . . . . . 19
     6.5.  End system location configuration  . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
     6.6.  When location should be configured . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
     6.7.  Conveying location in SIP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     6.8.  Location updates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     6.9.  Multiple locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
     6.10. Location validation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
     6.11. Default location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
     6.12. Other location considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
     6.13. LIS and LoST Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   7.  Uninitialized devices  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   8.  Routing the call to the PSAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
   9.  Signaling of emergency calls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
     9.1.  Use of TLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
     9.2.  SIP signaling requirements for  User Agents  . . . . . . . 27
     9.3.  SIP signaling requirements for proxy servers . . . . . . . 27
   10. Call backs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
   11. Mid-call behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
   12. Call termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
   13. Disabling of features  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
   14. Media  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
   15. Testing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
   16. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
   17. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
   18. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
     18.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
     18.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 37

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 2]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

1.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

   This document uses terms from [RFC3261] and
   [I-D.ietf-ecrit-requirements].  In addition the following terms are
   Access network:  The network that supplies IP packet service to an
      endpoint.  In a residential or small business environment, this
      might be a DSL or cable modem or WiMax service.  In a large
      enterprise environment, this would be the enterprise network.  In
      a mobile environment, this might be a mobile (cellular) data
      network or a WiFi network
   (Emergency) Call taker:  The person who answers an emergency call at
      the PSAP
   Confidence  The mathematically derived statistical estimate
      indicating how sure the measuring system is that the location data
      estimate is accurate, within the bounds defined by the Uncertainty
      value.  This is expressed as a percentage, such as 90%, or 45%
   Dispatch Location  Location used for dispatching responders to the
      person in need of assistance.  Must be precise as opposed to that
      needed for Routing Location.
   Emergency services routing proxy (ESRP):  A proxy server that
      provides routing services for a group of PSAPs
   Location configuration:  The process where an endpoint learns its
      physical location
   Location conveyance:  The process of sending location to another
   Location determination:  The process of finding where an endpoint is
      physically.  For example, the endpoint may contain a GPS receiver
      used to measure its own location or location may be determined by
      administration using a wiremap database or similar
   Location Information Server (LIS):  An element that stores location
      information for retrieval by an authorized entity
   Mobile device:  User agent that changes geographic location and
      possibly its network attachment point during an emergency call
   NENA (National Emergency Number Association):  A North American
      organization of public safety focused individuals defining
      emergency calling specifications and procedures
   Nomadic device (user):  User agent that is connected to the network
      temporarily, for relatively short durations, but does not move
      significantly during the lifetime of a network connection or
      during the emergency call.  Examples include a laptop using an
      IEEE 802.11 hotspot or a desk IP phone that is moved from one
      cubicle to another

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 3]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   Routing Location:  The location of an endpoint that is used for
      routing an emergency call.  May not be as precise as the Dispatch
   Stationary device:  An immobile user agent that is connected to the
      network at a fixed, long-term-stable geographic location.
      Examples include a home PC or a pay phone
   Uncertainty  The mathematically derived statistical estimate,
      expressed in meters, indicating the size of the area used in the
      calculation of Confidence.

2.  Introduction

   Requesting help in an emergency using a communications device such as
   a telephone or mobile is an accepted practice in most of the world.
   As communications devices increasingly utilize the Internet to
   interconnect and communicate, users will continue to expect to use
   such devices to request help, regardless of whether or not they
   communicate using IP.  This document describes establishment of a
   communications session by a user to a "Public Safety Answering Point"
   (PSAP) that is a call center established by response agencies to
   accept emergency calls.  Such citizen/visitor-to-authority calls can
   be distinguished from those that are created by responders
   (authority-to-authority) using public communications infrastructure
   often involving some kind of priority access as defined in Emergency
   Telecommunications Service (ETS) in IP Telephony [RFC4190].  They
   also can be distinguished from emergency warning systems that are

   Supporting emergency calling requires cooperation by a number of
   elements, their vendors and service providers.  It discusses how end
   device and applications create emergency calls, how access networks
   supply location for some of these devices, how service providers
   assist the establishment and routing, and how PSAPs receive calls
   from the Internet.

   The emergency response community will have to upgrade their
   facilities to support the wider range of communications services, but
   cannot be expected to handle wide variation in device and service
   capability.  New devices and services are being made available that
   could be used to make a request for help that are not traditional
   telephones, and users are increasingly expecting them to be used to
   place emergency calls.  However, many of the technical advantages of
   Internet multimedia require re-thinking of the traditional emergency
   calling architecture.  This challenge also offers an opportunity to
   improve the operation of emergency calling technology, while
   potentially lowering its cost and complexity.

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 4]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   It is beyond the scope of this document to enumerate and discuss all
   the differences between traditional (Public Switched Telephone
   Network) and IP based telephony, but calling on the Internet is
   characterized by:
   o  the interleaving over the same infrastructure of a wider variety
      of services;
   o  the separation of the access provider from the application
   o  the plethora of different media that can be accommodated;
   o  potential mobility of all end systems, including endpoints
      nominally thought of as fixed systems and not just those using
      radio access technology.  For example, a wired phone connected to
      a router using a mobile data network such as EV-DO as an uplink.

   This document focuses on how devices using the Internet can place
   emergency calls and how PSAPs can handle Internet multimedia
   emergency calls natively, rather than describing how circuit-switched
   PSAPs can handle VoIP calls.  In many cases, PSAPs making the
   transition from circuit-switched interfaces to packet-switched
   interfaces may be able to use some of the mechanisms described here,
   in combination with gateways that translate packet-switched calls
   into legacy interfaces, e.g., to continue to be able to use existing
   call taker equipment.  There are many legacy telephone networks that
   will persist long after most systems have been upgraded to IP
   origination and termination of emergency calls.  There will be PSAPs
   that require new systems to terminate to existing mechanisms for some
   time.  Many of these legacy systems use telephone number based
   routing.  Gateways and conversions between existing systems and newer
   systems defined by this document will be required.  Since existing
   systems are governed primarily by local government regulations and
   national standards, the gateway and conversion details will be
   governed by national standards and thus are out of scope for this

   Existing emergency call systems are organized locally or nationally;
   there are currently no international standards.  However, the
   Internet crosses national boundaries, and thus international
   standards for equipment and software are required.  To further
   complicate matters, VoIP endpoints can be connected through tunneling
   mechanisms such as virtual private networks (VPNs).  Tunnels can
   obscure the identity of the actual access network that knows the
   location.  This significantly complicates emergency calling, because
   the location of the caller and the first element that routes
   emergency calls can be on different continents, with different
   conventions and processes for handling of emergency calls.

   The IETF has historically refused to create national variants of its
   standards.  Thus, this document attempts to take into account best

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 5]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   practices that have evolved for circuit switched PSAPs, but makes no
   assumptions on particular operating practices currently in use,
   numbering schemes or organizational structures.

   This document discusses the use of the Session Initiation Protocol
   (SIP) [RFC3261] by PSAPs and calling parties.  While other inter-
   domain call signaling protocols may be used for emergency calling,
   SIP is ubiquitous and possesses the proper support of this use case.
   Only protocols such as H.323, XMPP/Jingle, ISUP and SIP are suitable
   for inter-domain communications, ruling out MGC protocols such as
   MGCP or H.248/Megaco.  The latter protocols can naturally be used by
   the enterprise or carrier placing the call, but any such call would
   reach the PSAP through a media gateway controller, similar to how
   inter-domain VoIP calls would be placed.  Other signaling protocols
   may also use protocol translation to communicate with a SIP-enabled

   Existing emergency services rely exclusively on voice and
   conventional text telephony ("TTY") media streams.  However, more
   choices of media offer additional ways to communicate and evaluate
   the situation as well as to assist callers and call takers in
   handling emergency calls.  For example, instant messaging and video
   could improve the ability to communicate and evaluate the situation
   and to provide appropriate instruction prior to arrival of emergency
   crews.  Thus, the architecture described here supports the creation
   of sessions of any media type, negotiated between the caller and PSAP
   using existing SIP protocol mechanisms [RFC3264].

   As a framework document, no normative behavior is contained herein.
   A companion document, [I-D.ietf-ecrit-phonebcp] describes Best
   Current Practice for this subject and contains normative language for
   devices, access and calling network elements.

   Supporting emergency calling does not require any specialized SIP
   header fields, request methods, status codes, message bodies, or
   event packages, but does require that existing mechanisms be used in
   certain specific ways, as described below.  User agents unaware of
   the recommendations in this draft may be able to place emergency
   calls, but functionality may be impaired.  For example, if the UA
   does not implement the location mechanisms described, an emergency
   call may not be routed to the correct PSAP, and if the caller is
   unable to supply his exact location, dispatch of emergency responders
   may be delayed.  Suggested behavior for both endpoints and servers is

   From the point of view of the PSAP three essential elements
   characterize an emergency call:

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 6]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   o  The call is routed to the most appropriate PSAP, selected
      principally by the location of the caller.
   o  The PSAP must be able to automatically obtain the location of the
      caller sufficiently accurate to dispatch a responder to help the
   o  The PSAP must be able to re-establish a session to the caller if
      for any reason the original session is lost.

3.  Overview of how emergency calls are placed

   An emergency call can be distinguished (Section 5) from any other
   call by a unique Service URN [I-D.ietf-ecrit-service-urn], that is
   placed in the call set-up signaling when a home or visited emergency
   dial string is detected.  Because emergency services are local to
   specific geographic regions, a caller must obtain his location
   (Section Section 6) prior to making emergency calls.  To get this
   location, either a form of measuring (e.g., GPS) (Section 6.2.3)
   device location in the endpoint is deployed, or the endpoint is
   configured (Section 6.5) with its location from the access network's
   Location Information Server (LIS).  The location is conveyed
   (Section 6.7) in the SIP signaling with the call.  The call is routed
   (Section 8) based on location using the LoST protocol
   [I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost], that maps a location to a set of PSAP or URIs.
   Each URI resolves to a PSAP or an Emergency Services Routing Proxy
   (ESRP) that serves an incoming proxy for group of PSAPs.  The call
   arrives at the PSAP with the location included in the INVITE request.

   The following is a quick overview for a typical Ethernet connected
   telephone using SIP signaling.  It illustrates one set of choices for
   various options presented later in this document.
   o  The phone "boots" and connects to its access network
   o  The phone gets location from the DHCP server [RFC4676] or
      [RFC3825], a HELD server [I-D.ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery]
      or the first level switch's LLDP server [LLDP].
   o  The phone obtains the local emergency dial string(s) from the
      [I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost] server for its current location.  It also
      receives and caches the PSAP URI obtained from LoST.
   o  It recognizes an emergency call from the dial strings and uses
      "urn:service:sos" [I-D.ietf-ecrit-service-urn] to mark an
      emergency call.
   o  It determines the PSAP's URI by querying the LoST mapping server
      with its location.
   o  It puts its location in the SIP INVITE in a Geolocation header
      [I-D.ietf-sip-location-conveyance] and forwards the call using its
      normal outbound call processing, that commonly involves an
      outgoing proxy.

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 7]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   o  The proxy recognizes the call as an emergency call and routes the
      call using normal SIP routing mechanisms to the URI specified.
   o  The call routing commonly traverses an incoming proxy server
      (ESRP) in the emergency services network.  That proxy would route
      to the PSAP.
   o  The call is established with the PSAP and common media streams are
   o  The location of the caller is displayed to the call taker.

          Configuration Servers
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    .                               .
    .   +--------+    +----------+  .
    . +--------+ |  +----------+ |  .
    . | LIS    | |  | SIP      | |  .
    . |        |-+  | Registrar|-+  .
    . +--------+    +----------+    .
    .   ^               ^           .
    . . | . . . . . . . | . . . . . .
        |               |
        |[M1][M4]       |[M2]
        |               |         +--------+
        |+--------------+       +--------+ |
        ||                      | LoST   | |
        ||+-------------------->| Servers|-+
        |||        [M3][M5]     +--------+       +-------+
        |||                                      | PSAP2 |
        |||                                      +-------+
        |||  [M6]  +-------+ [M7]+------+ [M8]+-------+
      Alice ------>| Proxy |---->| ESRP |---->| PSAP1 |-----> Call-Taker
                   +-------+     +------+     +-------+

                                                 | PSAP3 |

                Figure 1: Emergency Call Component Topology

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 8]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   The typical message flow would be:
   [M1] Alice -> LIS  LCP Request(s) (ask for location)
        LIS -> ALICE  LCP Reply(s) (replies with location)
   [M2] Alice -> Registrar SIP REGISTER
        Registrar -> Alice SIP 200 OK (REGISTER)
   [M3] Alice -> LoST Server Initial LoST Query (contains location)
        Lost Server -> Alice Initial LoST Response (contains
                          PSAP-URI and  dial string)

   *** Some time later, Alice dials/initiates emergency call ***

   [M4] Alice -> LIS  LCP Request (update location)
        LIS -> ALICE  LCP Reply (replies with location)
   [M5] Alice -> LoST Server Update LoST Query (contains location)
        Lost Server -> Alice LoST Response (contains PSAP-URI)
   [M6] Alice to Outgoing Proxy INVITE (service URN,
                                        Location and PSAP URI)
        Outgoing Proxy to ESRP INVITE (service URN,
                                        Location and PSAP URI)
        ESRP to PSAP INVITE (service URN, Location and PSAP URI)

   *** 200 OK and ACK propogated back from PSAP to Alice  ***

                   Figure 2: Emergency Call Message Flow

   Figure 1 shows emergency call component topology and the text above
   shows call establishment.  These include the following:
   o  Alice - who makes the emergency call.
   o  Configuration Servers - Servers providing Alice's UA its IP
      address and other configuration information, perhaps including
      location by-value or by-reference.  In this flow, DHCP is used as
      an example location configuration protocol (LCP).  Configuration
      servers also may include a SIP registrar for Alice's UA.  Most SIP
      UAs will register, so it will be a common scenario for UAs that
      make emergency calls to be registered with such a server in the
      originating calling network.  Registration would be required for
      the PSAP to be able to call back after an emergency call is
      completed.  All the configuration messages are labeled M1 through
      M3, but could easily require more than 3 messages to complete.
   o  ESRP - The emergency services routing proxy server that is the
      incoming call proxy in the emergency services domain.  The ESRP
      makes further routing decisions (e.g. based on PSAP state and the
      location of the caller) to choose the actual PSAP that handles the
      call.  In some jurisdictions, this may involve another LoST query.
   o  LoST server - Processes the LoST request for Location + Service
      URN to PSAP-URI Mapping function, either for an initial request
      from a UA, or an in-call routing by the Proxy server in the
      originating network, or possibly by an ESRP.

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                  [Page 9]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   o  PSAP - Call center where emergency calls are destined for.

   Generally, Alice's UA either has location configured manually, has an
   integral location measurement mechanism, or it runs a LCP [M1] to
   obtain location from the access (broadband) network.  For most
   devices, a LCP will be used, for example a DHCPREQUEST message or
   another location acquisition mechanism.  Alice's UA then will most
   likely register [M2] with a SIP domain.  This allows her to be
   contacted by other SIP entities.  Next, her UA will perform an
   initial LoST query [M3] to learn a URI for use if the LoST query
   fails during an emergency call, or to use to test the emergency call
   mechanism.  The LoST response may contain the dial string for
   emergency calls appropriate for the location provided.

   At some time after her device has booted, Alice initiates an
   emergency call.  She may do this by dialing an emergency dial string
   valid for her current ("local") location, or for her "home" location.

   The UA recognizes the dial string.  The UA attempts to refresh its
   location [M4], and with that location, to refresh the LoST mapping
   [M5], in order to get the most accurate information to use for
   routing the call.  If the location request or the LoST request fails,
   or takes too long, the UA uses values it has cached.

   The UA creates a SIP INVITE [M6] request that includes the location.
   [I-D.ietf-sip-location-conveyance] defines a SIP Geolocation header
   that contains either a location-by-reference URI or a [RFC2396] "cid"
   URL indicating where in the message body the location-by-value is.

   The INVITE message is routed to the ESRP [M7], that is the first
   inbound proxy for the emergency services domain.  This message is
   then routed by the ESRP towards the most appropriate PSAP for Alice's
   location [M8], as determined by PSAP state, location and other

   A proxy in the PSAP chooses an available call taker and extends the
   call to its UA.

   The 200 OK response to the INVITE request traverses the path in
   reverse, from call taker UA to PSAP proxy to ESRP to originating
   network proxy to Alice's UA.  The ACK completes the call set-up and
   the emergency call is established, allowing the PSAP call-taker to
   talk to Alice about Alice's emergency.

4.  Which devices and services should support  emergency calls

   Support for voice calls and real-time text calls placed through PSTN

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 10]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   facilities or systems connected to the PSTN is found in present
   PSAPs.  Future PSAPs will however support Internet connectivity and a
   wider range of media types and provide higher functionality.  In
   general, if a user could reasonably expect to be able to place a call
   for help with the device, then the device or service should support
   emergency calling.  Certainly, any device or service that looks like
   and works like a telephone (wired or mobile) should support emergency
   calling, but increasingly, users have expectations that other devices
   and services should work.

   Certainly, any device or service that looks like and works like a
   telephone (wired or mobile) should support emergency calling, but
   increasingly, users have expectations that other devices and services
   should work.

   Using current (evolving) standards, devices that create media
   sessions and exchange audio, video and/or text, and have the
   capability to establish sessions to a wide variety of addresses, and
   communicate over private IP networks or the Internet, should support
   emergency calls.

5.  Identifying an emergency call

   Using the PSTN, emergency help can often be summoned by dialing a
   nationally designated, widely known number, regardless of where the
   telephone was purchased.  The appropriate number is determined by the
   infrastructure the telephone is connected to.  However, this number
   differs between localities, even though it is often the same for a
   country or region, as it is in many countries in the European Union.
   In some countries, there is a single digit sequence that is used for
   all types of emergencies.  In others, there are several sequences
   that are specific to the type of responder needed, e.g., one for
   police, another for fire.  For end systems, on the other hand, it is
   desirable to have a universal identifier, independent of location, to
   allow the automated inclusion of location information and to allow
   the device and other entities in the call path to perform appropriate
   processing within the signaling protocol in an emergency call set-up.

   Since there is no such universal identifier, as part of the overall
   emergency calling architecture, common emergency call URNs are
   defined in [I-D.ietf-ecrit-service-urn].  An example, for a single
   number environment is "urn:service:sos".  Users are not expected to
   "dial" an emergency URN.  Rather, appropriate emergency dial strings
   is translated to corresponding service URNs, carried in the Request-
   URI of the INVITE.  Such translation is best done by the endpoint,
   because emergency calls convey location in the signaling, but non
   emergency calls do not normally do that.  If the device recognizes

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 11]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   the emergency call, it can include location.  Dial string recognition
   could be performed in a signaling intermediary (proxy server) if for
   some reason, the endpoint does not recognize it.  For devices that
   are mobile or nomadic, an issue arises of whether the home or visited
   dialing strings should be used.  Many users would prefer that their
   home dialing sequences work no matter where they are.  Local laws and
   regulations may require the visited dialing sequence(s) always work.
   Having the home dial string work is optional.

   The mechanism for obtaining the dialing sequences for a given
   location is provided by LoST [I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost].  If the endpoint
   does not support the translation of dial strings to telephone
   numbers, the dialing sequence would be represented as a dial string
   [RFC4967] and the outgoing proxy would recognize the dial string and
   translate to the service URN.  To determine the local dial string,
   the proxy needs the location of the endpoint.  This may be difficult
   in situations where the user can roam or be nomadic.  Endpoint
   recognition of emergency dial strings is therefore preferred, and in
   fact if a service provider is unable to guarantee that it can
   correctly determine local emergency dialstrings then it is required
   that the endpoint do the recognition.

   Note: It is undesirable to have a single "button" emergency call user
   interface element.  These mechanisms tend to result in a very high
   rate of false or accidental emergency calls.  In order to minimize
   this rate, devices SHOULD only initiate emergency calls based on
   entry of specific emergency call dial strings.

   While in some countries there is a single 3 digit dial string that is
   used for all emergency calls (i.e. 9-1-1 in North America), in some
   countries there are several 3 digit numbers used for different types
   of calls.  For example, in Switzerland, 1-1-7 is used to call police,
   1-1-8 is used to call the fire brigade, and 1-4-4 is used for
   emergency medical assistance.  In other countries, there are no
   "short codes" or "service codes" for 3 digit dialing of emergency
   services and local (PSTN) numbers are used.

   [I-D.ietf-ecrit-service-urn] introduces a universal emergency service
   URN scheme.  On the wire, emergency calls include this type of URI in
   the Request-URI [RFC3261].  The scheme includes a single emergency
   URN (urn:service:sos) for use in countries with a single emergency
   dial string, and responder-specific ones (urn:service:sos.police) for
   countries where the user dials each service with separate numbers.
   Using the service:sos URN scheme, emergency calls can be recognized
   as such throughout the Internet.

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 12]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

6.  Location and its role in an emergency call

   Location is central to the operation of emergency services.  It is
   frequently the case that the user in an emergency is unable to
   provide a unique, valid location themselves.  For this reason,
   location provided by the endpoint or the access network is needed.
   For practical reasons, each PSAP generally handles only calls for a
   certain geographic area, with overload arrangements between PSAPs to
   handle each others calls.  Other calls that reach it by accident must
   be manually re-routed (transferred) to the most appropriate PSAP,
   increasing call handling delay and the chance for errors.  The area
   covered by each PSAP differs by jurisdiction, where some countries
   have only a small number of PSAPs, while others decentralize PSAP
   responsibilities to the level of counties or municipalities.

   In most cases, PSAPs cover at least a city or town, but there are
   some areas where PSAP coverage areas follow old telephone rate center
   boundaries and may straddle more than one city.  Irregular boundaries
   are common, often for historical reasons.  Routing must be done based
   on PSAP service boundaries, the closest PSAP, or the PSAP that serves
   the nominal city name provided in the location may not be the correct

   Accuracy of routing location is a complex subject.  Calls must be
   routed quickly, but accurately, and location determination is often a
   time/accuracy tradeoff, especially with mobile devices or self
   measuring mechanisms.  It is considered acceptable to base a routing
   decision on an accuracy equal to the area of one sector of a mobile
   cell site if no more accurate routing location is available.

   Routing to the most appropriate PSAP is always calculated on the
   location of the caller, despite the fact that some emergency calls
   are placed on behalf of someone else, and the location of the
   incident is sometimes not the location of the caller.  In some cases,
   there are other factors that enter into the choice of the PSAP that
   gets the call, which may include factors other than location (such as
   caller media and language preference, PSAP state, etc.).  However,
   location of the caller is the primary input to the routing decision.

   Routing is but one of two uses for location in an emergency call.
   The other is for dispatch of a responder.  Many mechanisms used to
   locate a caller have a relatively long "cold start" time.  To get a
   location accurate enough for dispatch may take as much as 30 seconds.
   This is too long to wait for emergencies.  Accordingly, it is common,
   especially in mobile systems to use a coarse location, for example,
   the cell site and sector serving the call, for routing purposes, and
   then to update the location when a more precise value is known prior
   to dispatch.  In this document we use "routing location" and

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 13]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   "dispatch location" when the distinction matters.

   Accuracy of dispatch location is sometimes determined by local
   regulation, and is constrained by available technology.  The actual
   requirement exceeds available technology.  It is required that a
   device making an emergency call close to the "demising" or separation
   wall between two apartments in a high rise apartment building report
   location with sufficient accuracy to determine on what side of the
   wall it is on.  This implies perhaps a 3 cm accuracy requirement.  As
   of the date of this memo, typical assisted GPS uncertainty with 95%
   confidence is 100 m.  As technology advances, the accuracy
   requirements for location will need to be increased.  Wired systems
   using wire tracing mechanisms can provide location to a wall jack in
   specific room on a floor in a building, and may even specify a
   cubicle or even smaller resolution.  As this discussion illustrates,
   emergency call systems demand the most stringent location accuracy

   Location usually involves several steps to process and multiple
   elements are involved.  In Internet emergency calling, where the
   endpoint is located is "Determined" using a variety of measurement or
   wire-tracing methods.  Endpoints may be "Configured" with their own
   location by the access network.  In some circumstances, a proxy
   server may insert location into the signaling on behalf of the
   endpoint.  The location is "Mapped" to the URI to send the call to,
   and the location is "Conveyed" to the PSAP (and other elements) in
   the signaling.  Likewise, we employ Location Configuration Protocols,
   Location Mapping Protocols, and Location Conveyance Protocols for
   these functions.  The Location-to-Service Translation protocol
   [I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost] is the Location Mapping Protocol defined by the

6.1.  Types of location information

   There are several ways location can be specified:
   Civic  Civic location information describes the location of a person
      or object by a street address that corresponds to a building or
      other structure.  Civic location may include more finely grained
      location information such as floor, room and cubicle.  Civic
      information comes in two forms:
      Jurisdictional  This refers to a civic location using actual
         political subdivisions, especially for the community name.
      Postal  This refers to a civic location for mail delivery.  The
         name of the post office sometimes does not correspond to the
         community name and a postal address may contain post office
         boxes or street addresses that do not correspond to an actual
         building.  Postal addresses are generally unsuitable for
         emergency call dispatch because the post office conventions

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 14]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

         (for community name, for example) do not match those known by
         the responders.  The fact that they are unique can sometimes be
         exploited to provide a mapping between a postal address and a
         civic address suitable to dispatch a responder to.  In IETF
         location protocols, there is a element (Postal Community Name)
         that can be included in a location to provide the post office
         name as well as the actual jurisdictional community name.
         There is no other accommodation for postal addresses in these
   Geospatial (geo):  Geospatial addresses contain longitude, latitude
      and altitude information based on an understood datum and earth
      shape model.  While there have been many datums developed over
      time, most modern systems are using or moving towards the
      WGS84[WGS84] datum.
   Cell tower/sector:  Cell tower/sector is often used for identifying
      the location of a mobile handset, especially for routing of
      emergency calls.  Cell tower and sectors identify the cell tower
      and the antenna sector that a mobile device is currently using.
      Traditionally, the tower location is represented as a point chosen
      to be within a certain PSAP service boundary who agrees to take
      calls originating from that tower/sector, and routing decisions
      are made on that point.  Cell/sector information could also be
      represented as an irregularly shaped polygon of geospatial
      coordinates reflecting the likely geospatial location of the
      mobile device.  Whatever representation is used must route
      correctly in the LoST database, where "correct" is determined by
      local PSAP management.

   In IETF protocols, civic and geospatial forms are both supported.
   The civic forms include both postal and jurisdictional fields.  A
   cell tower/sector can be represented as a point (geo or civic) or
   polygon.  Other forms of location representation must be mapped into
   either a geo or civic for use in emergency calls.

   For emergency call purposes, conversion of location information from
   civic to geo or vice versa prior to conveyance is not desirable.  The
   location should be sent in the form it was determined.  Conversion
   between geo and civic requires a database.  PSAPs may need to convert
   from whatever form they receive to another for responder purposes.
   They have a suitable database.  However, if a conversion is done
   before the PSAP, and the database used is not exactly the one the
   PSAP uses, the double conversion has a high probability of
   introducing an error.

6.2.  Location Determination

   Location information can be entered by the user or installer of a
   device ("manual configuration"), measured by the end system, can be

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 15]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   delivered to the end system by some protocol or measured by a third
   party and inserted into the call signaling.  Choice of location
   determination mechanisms and their properties are out of scope for
   this document.

   In some cases, an entity may have multiple sources of location
   information, possibly partially contradictory.  This is particularly
   likely if the location information is determined both by the end
   system and a third party.  Although self measured location (e.g.
   GPS) is attractive, access network provided location could be much
   more accurate, and more reliable in some environments (indoor high
   rise in dense urban areas for example).  In general, the closer an
   entity is to the source of location, the more it is in the best
   position to determine which location is "best" for a particular
   purpose.  In emergency calling, the PSAP is the least likely to be
   able to appropriately choose which location when multiple conflicting
   locations are presented to it.

6.2.1.  User-entered location information

   Location information can be maintained by the end user or the
   installer of an endpoint in the endpoint itself, or in a database.

   Location information provided by end users is almost always less
   reliable than measured or wire database information, as users may
   mistype location information or may enter civic address information
   that does not correspond to a recognized (i.e. valid, see Section
   Section 6.10) address.  Users can neglect to change the data when the
   location of a device changes during or after movement.

   All that said, there are always a small number of cases where the
   automated mechanisms used by the access network to determine location
   fail to accurately reflect the actual location of the endpoint.  For
   example, the user may deploy his own WAN behind an access network,
   effectively removing an endpoint some distance from the access
   network's notion of its location.  There must be some mechanism
   provided to provision a location for an endpoint by the user or by
   the access network on behalf of a user.  The use of the mechanism
   introduces the possibility of users falsely declaring themselves to
   be somewhere they are not.  As an aside, normally, if an emergency
   caller insists that he is at a location different from what any
   automatic location determination system reports he is, responders
   will always be sent to the user's self-declared location.  However
   this is a matter of local policy and is outside the scope of this

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 16]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

6.2.2.  Access network "wire database" location information

   Location information can be maintained by the access network,
   relating some form of identifier for the end subscriber or device to
   a location database ("wire database").  In enterprise LANs, wiremap
   databases map Ethernet switch ports to building locations.  In DSL
   installations, the local telephone carrier maintains a mapping of
   wire-pairs to subscriber addresses.

   Accuracy of location historically has been to a street address level.
   However, this is not sufficient for larger structures.  The PIDF-LO
   [RFC4119] with a recent extension [I-D.ietf-geopriv-revised-civic-lo]
   permits interior building/floor/room and even finer specification of
   location within a street address.  When possible, interior location
   should be supported.

   The threshold for when interior location is needed is approximately
   650 m2 (that is derived from fire brigade recommendations of spacing
   of alarm pull stations) should have, but interior space layout,
   construction materials and other factors should be considered.  The
   ultimate goal is to be able to find the person in need quickly if
   responders arrive at the location given.

   Even for IEEE 802.11 wireless access points, wire databases may
   provide sufficient location resolution.  The location of the access
   point as determined by the wiremap may be supplied as the location
   for each of the clients of the access point.  However, this may not
   be true for larger-scale systems such as IEEE 802.16 (WiMAX) and IEEE
   802.22 that typically have larger cells than those of IEEE 802.11.
   The civic location of an IEEE 802.16 base station may be of little
   use to emergency personnel, since the endpoint could be several
   kilometers away from the base station.

   Wire databases to the home are likely to be the most promising
   solution for residential users where a service provider knows the
   customer's service address.  The service provider can then perform
   address validation (see Section 6.10), similar to the current system
   in some jurisdictions.

6.2.3.  End-system measured location information

   Global Positioning System (GPS) and similar satellite based (e.g.
   Galileo) receivers may be embedded directly in the end device.  GPS
   produces relatively high precision location fixes in open-sky
   conditions, but the technology still faces several challenges in
   terms of performance (time-to-fix and time-to-first-fix), as well as
   obtaining successful location fixes within shielded structures, or
   underground.  It also requires all devices to be equipped with the

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 17]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   appropriate GPS capability.  GPS-derived locations are currently
   accurate to tens of meters.  Many mobile devices require using some
   kind of "assist", that may be operated by the access network (A-GPS)
   or by a government (WAAS).

   GPS systems may be always on; where location will always be available
   accurately (assuming the device can "see" enough satellites).  Mobile
   devices may not be able to sustain the power levels required to keep
   the measuring system active.  This means that when location is
   needed, the device has to start up the measurement mechanism.  This
   typically takes tens of seconds, far too long to wait to be able to
   route an emergency call.  For this reason, devices that don't have
   end-system measured location mechanisms always on need another way to
   get a routing location.  Typically this would be a location
   associated with a radio link (cell site/sector).

6.2.4.  Network measured location information

   The access network may locate end devices.  Techniques include:
   Wireless triangulation:  Elements in the network infrastructure
      triangulate end systems based on signal strength, angle of arrival
      or time of arrival.  Common mechanisms deployed include:
      1.  Time Difference Of Arrival - TDOA
      2.  Uplink Time Difference Of Arrival - U-TDOA
      3.  Angle of Arrival - AOA
      4.  RF-Fingerprinting
      5.  Advanced Forward Link Trilateration - AFLT
      6.  Enhanced Forward Link Trilateration - EFLT
      Sometimes multiple mechanisms are combined, for example A-GPS with
   Location beacons:  A short range wireless beacon, e.g., using
      Bluetooth or infrared, announces its location to mobile devices in
      the vicinity.  This allows devices to get location from the beacon
      source's location.

6.3.  Who adds location, endpoint or proxy

   The IETF emergency call architecture prefers endpoints to learn their
   location and supply it on the call.  Outbound proxies that support
   devices that do not support location may have to add location to
   emergency calls at a proxy server.  Some calling networks have
   relationships with all access networks the device may be connected
   to, and that may allow the proxy to accurately determine location of
   the endpoint.  However NATs and other middleboxes often make it
   impossible to determine a reference identifier the access network
   could use to determine the location.  Systems designers are
   discouraged from relying on proxies to add location.  The technique
   may be useful in some limited circumstances as devices are upgraded

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 18]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   to meet the requirements of this document, or where relationships
   between access networks and calling networks are feasible and can be
   relied upon to get accurate location.

   Proxy insertion of location complicates dial string recognition.  As
   noted in Section Section 6, local dial strings depend on the location
   of the caller.  If the device does not know its own location, it
   cannot use the LoST service to learn the local emergency dial
   strings.  The calling network must provide another way for the device
   to learn the local dial string (and update it when the user moves to
   a location where the dial string(s) change) or do the dial string
   determination itself.

6.4.  Location and references to location

   Location information may be expressed as the actual civic or
   geospatial value but can be transmitted as by value (wholly contained
   within the signaling message) or by reference (a URI pointing to the
   value residing on a remote node waiting to be dereferenced).  Each
   form is better suited to some applications than others.

   When location is transmitted by value, the location information is
   available to each device; on the other hand, location objects can be
   large, and only represent a single snapshot of the device's location.
   Location references are small and can be used to represent a time-
   varying location, but the added complexity of the dereference step
   introduces a risk that location will not be available to parties that
   need it.

6.5.  End system location configuration

   Unless a user agent has access to provisioned or locally measured
   location information, it must obtain it from the access network.
   There are several location configuration protocols (LCPs) that can be
   used for this purpose such as:
   DHCP  DHCP can deliver civic [RFC4676] or geospatial [RFC3825]
      information.  User agents need to support both formats.  Note that
      a user agent can use DHCP, via the DHCP REQUEST or INFORM
      messages, even if it uses other means to acquire its IP address.
   HELD  HELD [I-D.ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery] can deliver a
      civic or geo, by value or by reference, as a layer 7 protocol.
      The query typically uses the IP address of the requestor as an
      identifier and returns the location value or reference associated
      with that identifier.  HELD is typically transported on HTTP.

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 19]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   Link-Layer Discovery Protocol  Layer Discovery Protocol [LLDP] with
      Media Endpoint Device extensions [LLDP-MED] can be used to deliver
      location information directly from the Layer 2 network
      infrastructure, and also supports both civic and geospatial
      formats identical in format to DHCP methods.

   Each LCP has limitations in the kinds of networks that can reasonably
   support it.  For this reason, it is not possible to choose a single
   mandatory-to-deploy LCP.  For endpoints with common network
   connections (such as an Ethernet jack or a WiFi connection) serious
   incompatibilities would ensue unless every network supported every
   protocol, or alternatively, every device supported every protocol.
   For this reason, a list of LCPs is established in
   [I-D.ietf-ecrit-phonebcp].  Every endpoint that could be used to
   place emergency calls must implement all of the protocols on the
   list.  Every access network must deploy at least one of them.  It is
   recognized that this is an onerous requirement, that it would be
   desirable to eliminate.  However, since it is the variability of the
   networks that prevent a single protocol from being acceptable, it
   must be the endpoints that implement all of them, and to accommodate
   a wide range of devices, networks must deploy at least one of them.

   Often, network operators and device designers believe that they have
   a simpler environment and some other network specific mechanism can
   be used to provide location.  Unfortunately, it is very rare to
   actually be able to limit the range of devices that may be connected
   to a network.

   For example, existing mobile networks are being used to support
   routers and LANs behind a wireless data network WAN connection, with
   Ethernet connected phones connected to that.  It is possible that the
   access network could support a protocol not on the list, and require
   every handset in that network to use that protocol for emergency
   calls.  However, the Ethernet connected phone won't be able to
   acquire location, and the user of the phone is unlikely to be
   dissuaded from placing an emergency call on that phone.  The
   widespread availability of gateways, routers and other network-
   broadening devices means that indirectly connected endpoints are
   possible on nearly every network.  Network operators and vendors are
   cautioned that shortcuts to meeting this requirement are seldom

   Location for non-mobile devices is normally expected to be acquired
   at network attachment time and retained by the device.  It should be
   refreshed when the cached value becomes invalid.  For example, if
   DHCP is the acquisition protocol, refresh of location may occur when
   the IP address lease is renewed.  At the time of an emergency call,
   the location should be refreshed, with the retained location used if

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 20]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   the location acquisition does not immediately return a value.  Mobile
   devices may determine location at network attachment time and
   periodically thereafter as a backup in case location determination at
   the time of call does not work.  Mobile device location may be
   refreshed when a TTL expires, the device moves beyond some boundaries
   (as provided by [I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost]).  Normally, mobile devices
   will acquire its location at call time for use in an emergency call
   routing.  See Section Section 6.8 for a further discussion on
   location updates for dispatch location.

   There are many examples of end devices which are applications running
   on a more general purpose device, such as a personal computer.  In
   some circumstances, it is not possible for application programs to
   access the network device at a level necessary to implement the LLDP-
   MED protocol, and in other cases, obtaining location via DHCP may be
   impossible.  In any case it is desirable for an operating system
   which could be used for any application which could make emergency
   calls to have an API which provides the location of the device for
   use by any application.

6.6.  When location should be configured

   Devices should get routing location immediately after obtaining local
   network configuration information.  The presence of NAT and VPN
   tunnels (that assign new IP addresses to communications) can obscure
   identifiers used by LCPs to determine location, especially using
   HELD.  In some cases, such as residential NAT devices, the NAT is
   before the access network demarcation point and thus the IP address
   seen by the access network is the right identifier for location of
   the residence.  In many enterprise environments, VPN tunnels can
   obscure the actual IP address.  Some VPN mechanisms can be bypassed
   (a query to the LCP can be designated to go through the direct IP
   path, using the correct IP address, and not through the tunnel).  In
   other cases, no bypass is possible.  Of course, LCPs that use Layer 2
   mechanisms (DHCP Location options and LLDP-MED) are usually immune
   from such problems because they do not use the IP address as the
   identifier for the device seeking location.

   It is desirable that routing location information be periodically
   refreshed.  A LIS supporting a million subscribers each refreshing
   once per day would need to support a query rate of 1,000,00 / (24 *
   60 * 60) = 12 queries per second.

   It is desirable for routing location information to be requested
   immediately before placing an emergency call.  However, if there is
   any significant delay in getting more recent location, the call
   should be placed with the most recent location information the device
   has.  In mobile handsets, routing is often accomplished with the cell

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 21]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   site and sector of the tower serving the call, because it can take
   many seconds to start up the location determination mechanism and
   obtain an accurate location.

   There is a tradeoff between the time it takes to get a routing
   location and the accuracy (technically, confidence and uncertainty)
   obtained.  Routing an emergency call quickly is required.  However,
   if location can be substantially improved by waiting a short time
   (e.g. for some sort of "quick fix"), it's preferable to wait. 3
   seconds, that is the current nominal time for a quick fix, is a very
   long time to wait for help, and systems designers should attempt to
   provide accurate routing location in much less time.

   NENA recommends IP based systems complete calls in two seconds (last
   dial press to ring at PSAP).

6.7.  Conveying location in SIP

   When an emergency call is placed, the endpoint should put location in
   the signaling with the call.  That is referred to as "conveyance" to
   distinguish it from "configuration".  In SIP, the location
   information is conveyed following the procedures in
   [I-D.ietf-sip-location-conveyance].  The form of the location
   information obtained by the acquisition protocol may not be the same
   as the conveyance protocol uses (PIDF-LO [RFC4119]).  Mapping by the
   endpoint to PIDF may be required.

6.8.  Location updates

   As discussed above, it make take some time for some measurement
   mechanisms to get a location accurate enough for dispatch, and a
   routing location with less accuracy may be provided to get the call
   established early.  The PSAP needs the dispatch location before it
   sends the call to the responder.  This requires an update of the

   In addition, the location of a mobile caller, e.g., in a vehicle or
   aircraft, can change significantly during the emergency call.  While
   most often this change is not significant, the PSAP must be able to
   get updated location information while it is processing the call.

   Subscription is preferred so that the LIS notifies the PSAP when
   accurate location is updated rather than requiring a poll operation
   from the PSAP to the LIS.

   A PSAP has no way to request an update of a location-by-value.  If
   the UAC gets new location, it must reINVITE or UPDATE to supply the
   new location.

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 22]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   Generally, the PSAP can wait for an accurate location for dispatch.
   However, there is no fixed limit known in advance; it depends on the
   nature of the emergency.  At some point the PSAP must dispatch.  In a
   subscription environment, the PSAP could update the parameters in the
   filter (immediate response required).  In a HELD dereference, there
   is no way to cancel and the PSAP will have to choose a ResponseTime
   that it will wait for even if it wants to dispatch sooner than that.
   (Change as the discussion on ResponseTime evolves).

6.9.  Multiple locations

   Handling multiple locations is discussed in
   [I-D.ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo-profile].  Conflicting location information
   is particularly harmful if different routes (PSAPs) result from LoST
   queries for the multiple locations.  Guidelines for dealing with
   multiple locations are also given in [I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost].
   Generally, if a UA gets multiple locations, it must choose the one to
   use.  If a proxy is inserting location and has multiple locations, it
   must choose the one to use.

   The ability of the UA or proxy to understand how and from whom it
   learned its location, and include this information element in the
   location object that is sent to the PSAP, provides the call-taker
   with many pieces of information to make decisions upon, and guidance
   for what to ask the caller and what to tell the responders.

   The call should indicate the location information that has been used
   for routing, so that the same location information is used for all
   call routing decisions.  The location conveyance mechanism
   [I-D.ietf-sip-location-conveyance] contains a parameter for this

6.10.  Location validation

   It is recommended that location must be validated prior to a device
   placing an actual emergency call; some jurisdictions require that
   this be done.  Validation in this context means both that there is a
   mapping from the address to a PSAP and that the PSAP understands how
   to direct responders to the location.  Determining the addresses that
   are valid can be difficult.  There are, for example, many cases of
   two names for the same street, or two streets with the same name in a
   city.  In some countries, the current system provides validation.
   For example, in the United States, the Master Street Address Guide
   (MSAG) records all valid street addresses and is used to ensure that
   the service addresses in phone billing records correspond to valid
   emergency service street addresses.  Validation is normally a concern
   for civic addresses, although there could be a concern that a given
   geo is within at least one PSAP service boundary; that is, a "valid"

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 23]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   geo is one where there is a mapping.

   LoST [I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost] includes a location validation function.
   Validation should ideally be performed when a location is entered
   into a Location Information Server.  It should be confirmed
   periodically, because the mapping database undergoes slow change; new
   streets are added or removed, community names change, postal codes
   change, etc.  Endpoints may wish to validate locations they receive
   from the access network, and will need to validate manually entered
   locations.  Proxies that insert location may wish to validate
   locations they receive from a LIS.  Test functions (Section 15)
   should also re-validate.

6.11.  Default location

   Occasionally, the access network cannot determine the actual location
   of the caller.  In these cases, it must supply a default location.
   The default location should be as accurate as the network can
   determine.  For example, in a cable network, a default location for
   each Cable Modem Termination System (CMTS), with a representative
   location for all cable modems served by that CMTS could be provided
   if the network is unable to resolve the subscriber to any unit less
   than the CMTS.  Default locations must be marked as such so that the
   PSAP knows that the location is not accurate.

6.12.  Other location considerations

   The endpoint is responsible for mapping any form of location it
   receives from an LCP into PIDF-LO form if the LCP did not directly
   return a PIDF.

6.13.  LIS and LoST Discovery

   If endpoints are to get their location and determine the routing of
   emergency calls, they must be able to discover a LIS (if the HELD
   protocol is used), and a LoST server.  DHCP options are defined for
   this purpose: [I-D.thomson-geopriv-lis-discovery] and

   In some cases, it may be necessary for the service provider to
   provision a LoST server address in the device.

7.  Uninitialized devices

   Support of devices that are not registered, or that don't have valid
   call back identifiers is complex.  In some jurisdictions, for some
   services, support of emergency calls from so-called "uninitialized"

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 24]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   devices is required.  For example, cellular providers in the United
   States must support calls to 9-1-1 from a mobile phone that does not
   have an active service contract.  It is attractive for such devices
   to be able to be used in an emergency.  However, the requirement to
   do so has caused a huge number of prank calls to the emergency
   service.  In some countries, it is common to attempt to place an
   emergency call from an unitialized device in the local bazaars to
   prove to a would-be purchaser that the phone works.  For this reason,
   PSAP authorities discourage support for unititialized devices.

   An unitialized device that can place an emergency call must supply
   location the same as a fully enabled device, must carry a call back
   URI that can be used to call the device back, and should have
   identifiers in the signaling that can be used to identify the device.

8.  Routing the call to the PSAP

   Emergency calls are routed based on one or more of the following
   criteria expressed in the call setup request (INVITE):
   Location:  Since each PSAP serves a limited geographic region and
      transferring existing calls delays the emergency response, calls
      need to be routed to the most appropriate PSAP.  In this
      architecture, emergency call setup requests contain location
      information, expressed in civic or geospatial coordinates, that
      allows such routing.  If there is no or imprecise (e.g., cell
      tower and sector) information at call setup time, an on-going
      emergency call may also be transferred to another PSAP based on
      location information that becomes available in mid-call.
   Type of emergency service:  In some jurisdictions, emergency calls
      for fire, police, ambulance or mountain rescue are directed to
      just those emergency-specific PSAPs.  This mechanism is supported
      by marking emergency calls with the proper service identifier
   Media capabilities of caller:  In some cases, emergency call centers
      for specific caller media preferences, such as typed text or
      video, are separate from PSAPs serving voice calls.  Routing based
      on media would be accomplished at an ESRP.  Also, even if media
      capability does not affect the selection of the PSAP, there may be
      call takers within the PSAP that are specifically trained, e.g.,
      in interactive text or sign language communications, where routing
      within the PSAP based on the media offer would be provided.

   Routing for calls by location and by service is the primary function
   LoST [I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost] provides.  LoST accepts a query with
   location (by-value) in either civic or geospatial form, plus a
   service identifier, and returns a URI (or set of URIs) to route the
   call to.  Normal SIP [RFC3261] routing functions are used to resolve

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 25]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   the URI to a next hop destination.

   The endpoint can complete the LoST mapping from its location at boot
   time, and periodically thereafter.  It should attempt to obtain a
   "fresh" location, and from that a current mapping when it places an
   emergency call.  If accessing either its location acquisition or
   mapping functions fail, it should use this cached value.  The call
   would follow its normal outbound call processing.

   Determining when the device leaves the area provided by the LoST
   service can tax small mobile devices.  For this reason, the LoST
   server should return a simple (small number of points) polygon for
   geo reported location [I-D.ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo-profile].  This can
   be an enclosing subset of the area when the reported point is not
   near an edge or a smaller edge section when the reported location is
   near an edge.  Civic location is uncommon for mobile devices, but
   reporting that the same mapping is good within a community name, or
   even a street, may be very helpful for WiFi connected devices that
   roam and obtain civic location from the AP they are connected to.

   Networks that support devices that do not implement LoST mapping
   themselves would have the outbound proxy do the mapping.  The proxy
   must have the location of the endpoint, that is often difficult for
   the calling network to accurately determine.  The endpoint may have
   its location, but would not normally include it on the call
   signaling.  There is no mechanism provided in
   [I-D.ietf-sip-location-conveyance] to allow a proxy to require the
   endpoint supply location, because that would open the endpoint to an
   attack by any proxy on the path to get it to reveal location.  The
   Proxy can redirect a call to the service URN that, if the device
   recognized the significance, would include location in the redirected
   call.  All networks should detect emergency calls and supply default
   location and/or routing if it is not already performed.

   With the URI obtained from mapping, whether by the endpoint or the
   proxy, the proxy routes the call.  Normal SIP [RFC3261] and [RFC3263]
   mechanisms are used to route calls to the URI obtained from the LoST

   Often, the SIP routing of an emergency call will first route to an
   incoming call proxy in the domain operated by the emergency service.
   That proxy is called an "Emergency Services Routing Proxy" (ESRP).
   The ESRP, which is a normal SIP proxy server, may use a variety of
   PSAP state information, the location of the caller, and other
   criteria to onward route the call to the PSAP.  In order for the ESRP
   to route on media choice, the initial INVITE has to supply an SDP

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 26]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

9.  Signaling of emergency calls

9.1.  Use of TLS

   As discussed above, location is carried in all emergency calls in the
   call signaling.  Since emergency calls carry privacy-sensitive
   information, they are subject to the requirements for geospatial
   protocols [RFC3693].  In particular, signaling information should be
   carried in TLS, i.e., in 'sips' mode.  Although there are exceptions
   in [RFC3693] for emergency calls (for example, local policy may
   dictate that location is sent with an emergency call even if the
   user's policy would otherwise prohibit that), it is unacceptable to
   have an emergency call fail to complete because a TLS connection was
   not created for any reason.  Thus the call should be attempted with
   TLS, but if the TLS session establishment fails, the call should be
   automatically retried without TLS.  [I-D.ietf-sip-sips] recommends
   that to achieve this effect the target request a sip URI, but use TLS
   on the outbound connection.  An element that recieves a request over
   a TLS connection should attempt to create a TLS connection to the
   next hop.

   Location may be used for routing by multiple proxy servers on the
   path.  Confidentiality mechanisms such as S/MIME encryption of SIP
   signaling [RFC3261] cannot be used because they obscure location.
   Only hop-by-hop mechanisms such as TLS should be used.  Many SIP
   devices do not support TLS.  Implementing location conveyance in SIP
   mandates inclusion of TLS support.

   In many cases, persistent TLS connections can be maintained between
   elements to minimize the time needed to establish them
   [I-D.ietf-sip-outbound].  In other circumstances, use of session
   resumption [RFC4507] is recommended.  IPSEC [RFC2401] is an
   acceptable alternative to TLS.

9.2.  SIP signaling requirements for  User Agents

   SIP UAs that do local dial string interpretation, location, and
   emergency call route will create SIP INVITE messages with the Service
   URN in the Request URI, the LoST-determined URI for the PSAP in a
   Route header, and the location in a Geolocation header.  The INVITE
   must also have appropriate call back identifiers To enable media
   sensitive routing, the call should include an SDP offer.

9.3.  SIP signaling requirements for proxy servers

   SIP Proxy servers in the path of an emergency call must be able to
   assist UAs that are unable to provide any of the location based
   routing steps and recognition of dial strings.  They are also

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 27]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   expected to provide identity information for the caller.

10.  Call backs

   The call-taker must be able to reach the emergency caller if the
   original call is disconnected.  In traditional emergency calls,
   wireline and wireless emergency calls include a callback identifier
   for this purpose.  In SIP systems, the caller must include a Contact
   header field indicating its device URI, if globally routable, or
   possibly a GRUU [I-D.ietf-sip-gruu] if calls need to be routed via a
   proxy.  This identifier would be used to initiate call-backs
   immediately by the call-taker if, for example, the call is
   prematurely dropped.  This is a change from [RFC3261] where Contact:
   is optional.

   In addition, a call-back identifier must be included either as the
   URI in the From header field [RFC3261] verified by SIP Identity
   [RFC4474] , or as a network asserted URI [RFC3325].  This identifier
   would be used to initiate a call-back at a later time and may reach
   the caller, not necessarily on the same device (and at the same
   location) as the original emergency call as per normal SIP rules.

   Emergency authorities generally discourage support of unitialized
   devices (see Section 7.  If an uninitialized device does place an
   emergency call, some kind of call back URI must be provided (e.g. a
   GRUU) in the Contact: header.  It is useful to be able to call the
   device back some time later as well by including some form of URI in
   a network asserted identity.

11.  Mid-call behavior

   A PSAP may need to REFER [RFC3515] a call to a bridge for
   conferencing.  The caller should also be prepared to have the call
   transferred (usually attended, but possibly blind) as per
   [I-D.ietf-sipping-service-examples].  PSAPs often include
   dispatchers, responders or specialists on a call.  Some responder's
   dispatchers are not located in the primary PSAP.  The call may have
   to be transferred to another PSAP.  Most often this will be an
   attended transfer, or a bridged transfer.  Relay services for
   communication with people with disabilities may be included in the
   call in this way.

   SIP Caller Preferences [RFC3841] can be used to signal how the PSAP
   should handle the call.  For example, a language preference expressed
   in an Accept-Language header may be used as a hint to cause the PSAP
   to route the call to a call taker who speaks the requested language.

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 28]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   SIP Caller Preferences may also be used to indicate a need to invoke
   a relay service for communication with people with disabilities in
   the call.

12.  Call termination

   It is undesirable for the caller to terminate an emergency call.
   PSAP call termination is accomplished with normal SIP call
   termination procedures.

13.  Disabling of features

   Certain features that can be invoked while a normal call is active
   are not permitted when the call is an emergency call.  Services such
   as Call Waiting, Call Transfer, Three Way Call and Flash Hold should
   be disabled.

   Certain features can interfere with calls from a PSAP and should be
   disabled.  The domain of a PSAP can be determined from the domain
   answering an emergency call.  A time limit after an emergency call
   should be established during which any call from the same domain and
   directed to the supplied Contact: or AoR should be accepted as a
   call-back from the PSAP.

14.  Media

   PSAPs should always accept RTP media streams [RFC3550].
   Traditionally, voice has been the only media stream accepted by
   PSAPs.  In some countries, text, in the form of BAUDOT codes or
   similar tone encoded signaling within a voiceband is accepted ("TTY")
   for persons who have hearing disabilities.  With the Internet comes a
   wider array of potential media that a PSAP should accept.  Using SIP
   signaling includes the capability to negotiate media.  Normal SIP
   offer/answer [RFC3264] negotiations should be used to agree on the
   media streams to be used.  PSAPs should accept real-time text
   [RFC4103].  All PSAPs should accept G.711 A law (and mu Law in North
   America) encoded voice as described in [RFC3551].  Newer text forms
   are rapidly appearing, with Instant Messaging now very common, PSAPs
   should accept IM with at least [RFC3428] as well as [RFC3920].  Video
   may be important to support Video Relay Service (Sign language
   interpretation) as well as modern video phones.

   While it is desirable for media to be kept secure, preferably by use
   of Secure RTP [RFC3711], there is not yet consensus on how best to
   signal keying material for SRTP.  As a consequence, no recommendation

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 29]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   to support SRTP can yet be made for emergency calls.

15.  Testing

   Since the emergency calling architecture consists of a number of
   pieces operated by independent entities, it is important to be able
   to test whether an emergency call is likely to succeed without
   actually occupying the human resources at a PSAP.  Both signaling and
   media paths need to be tested since NATs and firewalls may allow the
   session setup request to reach the PSAP, while preventing the
   exchange of media.

   [I-D.ietf-ecrit-phonebcp] includes a description of an automated test
   procedure that validates routing, signaling and media path
   continuity.  This test would be used at boot time, and whenever the
   device location changes enough that a new PSAP mapping is returned
   from LoST.  A manual operation for the test should also be possible.

   The PSAP needs to be able to control frequency and duration of the
   test, and since the process could be overused, it may temporarily or
   permanently suspend its operation.

   There is a concern associated with testing during a so-called
   "avalanche-restart" event where, for example a large power outage
   affects a large number of endpoints, that, when power is restored,
   all attempt to reboot and, possibly, test.  Devices need to randomize
   their initiation of a boot time test to avoid the problem.

16.  Security Considerations

   Security considerations for emergency calling have been documented in
   [I-D.ietf-ecrit-security-threats], and [I-D.barnes-geopriv-lo-sec].

   Ed.  Note: go through that doc and make sure any actions needed are
   captured in the BCP text.

17.  Acknowledgements

   This draft was created from a
   draft-schulzrinne-sipping-emergency-arch-02 together with sections
   from draft-polk-newton-ecrit-arch-considerations-02.

   Design Team members participating in this draft creation include
   Hannes Tschofenig, Ted Hardie, Martin Dolly, Marc Linsner, Roger
   Marshall, Stu Goldman, Shida Schubert and Tom Taylor.  Further

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 30]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   comments and input was provided by Richard Barnes, Barbara Stark and
   James Winterbottom.

18.  References

18.1.  Normative References

              Barnes, R., "Threats to GEOPRIV Location Objects",
              draft-barnes-geopriv-lo-sec-00 (work in progress),
              July 2007.

              Schulzrinne, H., "A Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
              (DHCP) based Location-to-Service  Translation Protocol
              (LoST) Discovery Procedure",
              draft-ietf-ecrit-dhc-lost-discovery-02 (work in progress),
              July 2007.

              Hardie, T., "LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation
              Protocol", draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-06 (work in progress),
              August 2007.

              Rosen, B. and J. Polk, "Best Current Practice for
              Communications Services in support of Emergency  Calling",
              draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp-02 (work in progress),
              September 2007.

              Schulzrinne, H. and R. Marshall, "Requirements for
              Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies",
              draft-ietf-ecrit-requirements-13 (work in progress),
              March 2007.

              Taylor, T., "Security Threats and Requirements for
              Emergency Call Marking and Mapping",
              draft-ietf-ecrit-security-threats-05 (work in progress),
              August 2007.

              Schulzrinne, H., "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for
              Emergency and Other Well-Known Services",
              draft-ietf-ecrit-service-urn-07 (work in progress),
              August 2007.

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 31]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

              Barnes, M., Winterbottom, J., Thomson, M., and B. Stark,
              "HTTP Enabled Location Delivery (HELD)",
              draft-ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery-03 (work in
              progress), November 2007.

              Winterbottom, J., Thomson, M., and H. Tschofenig, "GEOPRIV
              PIDF-LO Usage Clarification, Considerations and
              Recommendations", draft-ietf-geopriv-pdif-lo-profile-10
              (work in progress), October 2007.

              Thomson, M. and J. Winterbottom, "Revised Civic Location
              Format for PIDF-LO",
              draft-ietf-geopriv-revised-civic-lo-06 (work in progress),
              October 2007.

              Rosenberg, J., "Obtaining and Using Globally Routable User
              Agent (UA) URIs (GRUU) in the  Session Initiation Protocol
              (SIP)", draft-ietf-sip-gruu-15 (work in progress),
              October 2007.

              Polk, J. and B. Rosen, "Location Conveyance for the
              Session Initiation Protocol",
              draft-ietf-sip-location-conveyance-08 (work in progress),
              July 2007.

              Jennings, C. and R. Mahy, "Managing Client Initiated
              Connections in the Session Initiation Protocol  (SIP)",
              draft-ietf-sip-outbound-10 (work in progress), July 2007.

              Audet, F., "The use of the SIPS URI Scheme in the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", draft-ietf-sip-sips-07 (work
              in progress), November 2007.

              Channabasappa, S., "A Framework for Session Initiation
              Protocol User Agent Profile Delivery",
              draft-ietf-sipping-config-framework-14 (work in progress),
              November 2007.

              Thomson, M. and J. Winterbottom, "Discovering the Local

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 32]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

              Location Information Server (LIS)",
              draft-thomson-geopriv-lis-discovery-03 (work in progress),
              September 2007.

   [LLDP]     IEEE, "IEEE802.1ab Station and Media Access Control",
              Dec 2004.

              TIA, "ANSI/TIA-1057 Link Layer Discovery Protocol - Media
              Endpoint Discovery".

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2396]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
              Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396,
              August 1998.

   [RFC2401]  Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "Security Architecture for the
              Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998.

   [RFC3261]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
              A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
              Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
              June 2002.

   [RFC3263]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation
              Protocol (SIP): Locating SIP Servers", RFC 3263,
              June 2002.

   [RFC3264]  Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model
              with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264,
              June 2002.

   [RFC3265]  Roach, A., "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-Specific
              Event Notification", RFC 3265, June 2002.

   [RFC3311]  Rosenberg, J., "The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
              UPDATE Method", RFC 3311, October 2002.

   [RFC3325]  Jennings, C., Peterson, J., and M. Watson, "Private
              Extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for
              Asserted Identity within Trusted Networks", RFC 3325,
              November 2002.

   [RFC3428]  Campbell, B., Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Huitema, C.,
              and D. Gurle, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension
              for Instant Messaging", RFC 3428, December 2002.

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 33]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   [RFC3515]  Sparks, R., "The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Refer
              Method", RFC 3515, April 2003.

   [RFC3550]  Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V.
              Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time
              Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003.

   [RFC3551]  Schulzrinne, H. and S. Casner, "RTP Profile for Audio and
              Video Conferences with Minimal Control", STD 65, RFC 3551,
              July 2003.

   [RFC3693]  Cuellar, J., Morris, J., Mulligan, D., Peterson, J., and
              J. Polk, "Geopriv Requirements", RFC 3693, February 2004.

   [RFC3711]  Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K.
              Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)",
              RFC 3711, March 2004.

   [RFC3825]  Polk, J., Schnizlein, J., and M. Linsner, "Dynamic Host
              Configuration Protocol Option for Coordinate-based
              Location Configuration Information", RFC 3825, July 2004.

   [RFC3840]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., and P. Kyzivat,
              "Indicating User Agent Capabilities in the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3840, August 2004.

   [RFC3841]  Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., and P. Kyzivat, "Caller
              Preferences for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)",
              RFC 3841, August 2004.

   [RFC3856]  Rosenberg, J., "A Presence Event Package for the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3856, August 2004.

   [RFC3920]  Saint-Andre, P., Ed., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
              Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 3920, October 2004.

   [RFC4033]  Arends, R., Austein, R., Larson, M., Massey, D., and S.
              Rose, "DNS Security Introduction and Requirements",
              RFC 4033, March 2005.

   [RFC4103]  Hellstrom, G. and P. Jones, "RTP Payload for Text
              Conversation", RFC 4103, June 2005.

   [RFC4119]  Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object
              Format", RFC 4119, December 2005.

   [RFC4190]  Carlberg, K., Brown, I., and C. Beard, "Framework for
              Supporting Emergency Telecommunications Service (ETS) in

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 34]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

              IP Telephony", RFC 4190, November 2005.

   [RFC4474]  Peterson, J. and C. Jennings, "Enhancements for
              Authenticated Identity Management in the Session
              Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 4474, August 2006.

   [RFC4507]  Salowey, J., Zhou, H., Eronen, P., and H. Tschofenig,
              "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Session Resumption without
              Server-Side State", RFC 4507, May 2006.

   [RFC4676]  Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
              (DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) Option for Civic Addresses
              Configuration Information", RFC 4676, October 2006.

   [RFC4967]  Rosen, B., "Dial String Parameter for the Session
              Initiation Protocol Uniform Resource Identifier",
              RFC 4967, July 2007.

18.2.  Informative References

              Johnston, A., "Session Initiation Protocol Service
              Examples", draft-ietf-sipping-service-examples-13 (work in
              progress), July 2007.

   [RFC3966]  Schulzrinne, H., "The tel URI for Telephone Numbers",
              RFC 3966, December 2004.

   [WGS84]    NIMA, "NIMA Technical Report TR8350.2, Department of
              Defense World Geodetic System 1984, Its Definition and
              Relationships With Local Geodetic Systems, Third Edition",
              July 1997.

Authors' Addresses

   Brian Rosen
   NeuStar, Inc.
   470 Conrad Dr
   Mars, PA  16046

   Email: br@brianrosen.net

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 35]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

   Henning Schulzrinne
   Columbia University
   Department of Computer Science
   450 Computer Science Building
   New York, NY  10027

   Phone: +1 212 939 7042
   Email: hgs@cs.columbia.edu
   URI:   http://www.cs.columbia.edu

   James Polk
   Cisco Systems
   3913 Treemont Circle
   Colleyville, Texas  76034

   Phone: +1-817-271-3552
   Email: jmpolk@cisco.com

   Andrew Newton
   4900 Seminary Road
   Alexandria, VA  22311

   Phone: +1 703 845 0656
   Email: andy@hxr.us

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 36]

Internet-Draft          Emergency Call Framework           November 2007

Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an

Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at


   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).

Rosen, et al.             Expires May 22, 2008                 [Page 37]

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/