VoIP Mailing List Archives
Mailing list archives for the VoIP community |
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jra at baylink.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 12:22 pm Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
 |
|
On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 12:17:54PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
| Quote: | | Quote: | How do those calls go when you do them, Steve?
|
The calls go well with 911. A few times, the operator seemed slightly
annoyed but in the DC/Balto area, they are overworked and
understaffed.
http://www.911dispatch.com/info/fact_figures.html
# 1,296 PSAPs are staffed by a single, on-duty dispatcher (NENA, 2003)
# Washington (DC) receives 1.8 million 911 calls per year, Los Angeles
5 million, Baltimore (MD) 1.7 million
The customer is almost always in shock when I make the call but I feel
it goes a long way to show that you are not just concerned with
selling a system and making a buck, you actually care about their
wellbeing. The six or seven that had the wrong information, the
customers were very thankful that I the testing.
|
Ok.
So what do you *say*, in reply to "what is your emergency?"
(Around here, they *really* don't want you calling to check on movie
times. 
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
Those who count the vote decide everything.
-- (Joseph Stalin)
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
trixter at 0xdecafbad.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 12:47 pm Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 13:16 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
| Quote: | So what do you *say*, in reply to "what is your emergency?"
|
I havent been following this that closely but what I did read he said
that he says something along the lines of
"I am the telephone guy I wanted to make sure that the address
information is infact correct"
He didnt use quotes or be quite that specific, but generally yeah.
--
Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel
Belfast +44 28 9099 6461 US +1 516 687 5200
http://www.trxtel.com the phone company that pays you!
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aklists at mixdown.ca
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 12:59 pm Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
On May 5, 2008 01:42:03 pm Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
| Quote: | I havent been following this that closely but what I did read he said
that he says something along the lines of
"I am the telephone guy I wanted to make sure that the address
information is infact correct"
He didnt use quotes or be quite that specific, but generally yeah.
|
Pretty much what I was told to do. Call 911, state clearly that this is NOT
an emergency, and ask them if they have a moment to verify the address
information for this phone number.
Where I live the police seem to be required to make a stop at the place to
make sure the caller is not being coerced, but other than that the operators
have always been very helpful.
-A.
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andres at paglayan.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 3:13 pm Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 18:27 -0700, Trevor Peirce wrote:
Problem ain't voip not doing 911 but 911 not doing voip
more will die until a suit is properly filled and 911 compelled by law to receive 911 voip calls |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tpeirce at digitalcon.ca
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 8:21 pm Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
Drew Gibson wrote:
| Quote: | This call was one of the marginal cases and this is the question I was
trying to ask. As with most emergencies, this situation was created by
a combination of failures.
Rightly or wrongly the current situation is that...
1. The customer expects the Telco to take care of 911 entirely, as
they always have in the past.
|
Indeed. The VoIP provider should take a more proactive role to ensure
the customer understands that 911 address != billing address. First,
the regulations require periodic reminders be sent to the customer to
keep their address current. Second, it would be good practice for all
providers to offer to update 911 address at the same time when they are
processing a billing address update.
| Quote: | 2. The VoIP provider expects the customer to update their 911 address,
as the provider cannot strictly control location (except the cable
providers such as Shaw Cable, through which the ambulance was
correctly dispatched)
|
As above. Cable companies have a benefit that they attach their device
to your house so it cannot be moved without them coming out and doing it
for you. Thus, they are allowed to route directly to a PSAP and use
E911. VoIP is not allowed to do this per CRTC regulations.
| Quote: | I'll leave it to the lawyers to apportion blame but, in the mean time,
how is this disconnect being addressed by VoIP and 911 service providers?
|
In my opinion the address not being updated is a very small factor of
the failure at hand. The bigger failure is the lack of communication to
verify the caller's address or let them speak to the PSAP directly. If
the caller did speak to the PSAP, or if the caller told the person on
the phone that the old address was correct, then the point of failure
shifts from the VoIP provider/911 termination partner to the caller.
However, it is my understanding that the address was not verified with
the caller and that the caller never spoke to the PSAP, and that is why
this happened.
The current implemented system in Canada has room for improvement, but
the processes required by law does work fine and requires several stages
that would have prevented this failure if they had been followed by all
involved parties. It will be interesting to find out the details of
what exactly went wrong.
Because of this failure, here is today's article recommending against
VoIP services:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/05/rethinking-voip.htm
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asterisk-biz at ics-il...
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 9:41 pm Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
I really don't think that has anything to do with it. Who cares what the connection method is as long as the proper destination is reached?
----------
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
| Quote: | ----- Original Message -----
From: andres (andres@paglayan.com)
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion (asterisk-biz@lists.digium.com)
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to you
On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 18:27 -0700, Trevor Peirce wrote:
Problem ain't voip not doing 911 but 911 not doing voip
more will die until a suit is properly filled and 911 compelled by law to receive 911 voip calls
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andres at paglayan.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 9:44 pm Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 21:33 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
| Quote: | I really don't think that has anything to do with it. Who cares what the connection method is as long as the proper destination is reached?
|
is not only reaching, but how and who |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sip at arcdiv.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 5:03 am Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
The comments in that article, which, by the way, is not reachable at the
URL you provided (you left off an l :
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/05/rethinking-voip.html)
show that people really still have no grasp on the technology used for
VoIP or the difficulties in providing E911 service.
Some of the questions/suggestions given were things like:
-Why can't we put GPS into VoIP phones like we do in cell phones?
- Be like AT&T and the minute a phone changes locations (changes IPs),
lock it out completely until the customer provides current location
information or verifies he's at the old location.
Neither of which are terribly effective. GPS is rather unreliable
indoors, and if you're truly on the move, having your phone stop working
every time you switch APs until you reconfirm your location (which you
may not even know) is, perhaps, a worthless solution.
The overall problem lies in the way people view VoIP as a replacement
for telephones. Skype is VoIP, but its dependence on the computer puts
it into a class of VoIP services such as those tied with other IM
services that people simply don't EXPECT to behave like a phone.
However, when you have a service which CAN be used with something like a
phone, people then expect it to behave just like a phone in all ways.
They've tied their awareness to a familiar paradigm, and they're unable
to expand beyond that.
It's really fascinating from the standpoint of psychology.
When WiMax comes into play in a larger scale (assuming it ever becomes
cost-effective), it will open up yet further avenues of misconception.
Will my new WiMax-enabled GoogleTalk Communicator or AIM Handset have
E911? I mean... it LOOKS like a phone, right? So it should have E911. Of
course, if I'm outdoors, they might have GPS built in, but if I'm
downstairs in the mall, with wifi repeaters all around to keep the
signal strong, and just roaming from store to store, how would anyone
ever know where to find me?
These are basic problems for which NO one has a solution. As many
E911-capable VoIP services as there are these days, the simple fact
remains that truly nomadic VoIP does not have the infrastructure yet to
be able to handle E911. And the more flexible we make it, the less
chance we will ever solve that problem without massive redesigns of the
way IP is routed and handled.
Trevor Peirce wrote:
| Quote: | Drew Gibson wrote:
| Quote: | This call was one of the marginal cases and this is the question I was
trying to ask. As with most emergencies, this situation was created by
a combination of failures.
Rightly or wrongly the current situation is that...
1. The customer expects the Telco to take care of 911 entirely, as
they always have in the past.
|
Indeed. The VoIP provider should take a more proactive role to ensure
the customer understands that 911 address != billing address. First,
the regulations require periodic reminders be sent to the customer to
keep their address current. Second, it would be good practice for all
providers to offer to update 911 address at the same time when they are
processing a billing address update.
| Quote: | 2. The VoIP provider expects the customer to update their 911 address,
as the provider cannot strictly control location (except the cable
providers such as Shaw Cable, through which the ambulance was
correctly dispatched)
|
As above. Cable companies have a benefit that they attach their device
to your house so it cannot be moved without them coming out and doing it
for you. Thus, they are allowed to route directly to a PSAP and use
E911. VoIP is not allowed to do this per CRTC regulations.
| Quote: | I'll leave it to the lawyers to apportion blame but, in the mean time,
how is this disconnect being addressed by VoIP and 911 service providers?
|
In my opinion the address not being updated is a very small factor of
the failure at hand. The bigger failure is the lack of communication to
verify the caller's address or let them speak to the PSAP directly. If
the caller did speak to the PSAP, or if the caller told the person on
the phone that the old address was correct, then the point of failure
shifts from the VoIP provider/911 termination partner to the caller.
However, it is my understanding that the address was not verified with
the caller and that the caller never spoke to the PSAP, and that is why
this happened.
The current implemented system in Canada has room for improvement, but
the processes required by law does work fine and requires several stages
that would have prevented this failure if they had been followed by all
involved parties. It will be interesting to find out the details of
what exactly went wrong.
Because of this failure, here is today's article recommending against
VoIP services:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/05/rethinking-voip.htm
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
|
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
beckman at angryox.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 10:13 am Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
On Tue, 6 May 2008, SIP wrote:
| Quote: | Neither of which are terribly effective. GPS is rather unreliable
indoors, and if you're truly on the move, having your phone stop working
every time you switch APs until you reconfirm your location (which you
may not even know) is, perhaps, a worthless solution.
|
The ISPs could provide IP-to-Address mapping for dynamic IP assignments.
The ISP knows who the customer is (at least in theory, technically) when
they dole out an IP to them, and if the service is something like FIOS,
DSL or another physical entity, the ISP should be able to provide
registered ISPs a service where the IP can be queried for the address, and
potentially matched to the data provided, or maybe even as a trusted
source of the data.
While technically pheasable, and with most of the ISPs having been phone
companies both currently and in a past life, and their knowledge and
experience with providing 911 services in the past where people didn't
have to tell the phone company where they were, it would probably take the
Government to take action to force the ISPs to do this. And even then, I
know there are people on the list capable of shooting holes in this as
well.
I do like the GPS idea, but make it aGPS. You don't need to have service
with a wireless carrier in order to listen to the signal or talk to the
tower. If you know where the tower is, you can get a decent idea where
you are +/- 1 mile and push the call to the right 911 center. But then
again, sure, if you are in the boonies with no cell towers, you are hosed.
But if the ATA can pick up a signal, and it DOES get a GPS fix, it should
be able to pass that or be query-able.
| Quote: | These are basic problems for which NO one has a solution.
|
That's because there is no good one-size-fits-all solution. What I've
thrown out is just more of a "it might work in some cases" solution. This
is a complex problem, and nobody has an easy solution. I think the best
solution will be a combination of technical solutions and good testing.
There really should be a new number, "912" that routes like 911 except to
a recording that states the location you would reach if you dialed 911,
and the information they have on file (or passed in the call). Easy to
verify, easy (well, maybe) to implement, and no operators annoyed with
"test" calls.
Beckman
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Beckman Internet Guy
beckman@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andres at paglayan.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 11:11 am Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 05:57 -0400, SIP wrote: | Quote: | | Quote: |
The comments in that article, which, by the way, is not reachable at the
URL you provided (you left off an l :
[url=http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/05/rethinking-voip.html)]http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/05/rethinking-voip.html)[/url]
show that people really still have no grasp on the technology used for
VoIP or the difficulties in providing E911 service.
Some of the questions/suggestions given were things like:
-Why can't we put GPS into VoIP phones like we do in cell phones?
- Be like AT&T and the minute a phone changes locations (changes IPs),
lock it out completely until the customer provides current location
information or verifies he's at the old location.
Neither of which are terribly effective. GPS is rather unreliable
indoors, and if you're truly on the move, having your phone stop working
every time you switch APs until you reconfirm your location (which you
may not even know) is, perhaps, a worthless solution.
The overall problem lies in the way people view VoIP as a replacement
for telephones. Skype is VoIP, but its dependence on the computer puts
it into a class of VoIP services such as those tied with other IM
services that people simply don't EXPECT to behave like a phone.
However, when you have a service which CAN be used with something like a
phone, people then expect it to behave just like a phone in all ways.
They've tied their awareness to a familiar paradigm, and they're unable
to expand beyond that.
It's really fascinating from the standpoint of psychology.
When WiMax comes into play in a larger scale (assuming it ever becomes
cost-effective), it will open up yet further avenues of misconception.
Will my new WiMax-enabled GoogleTalk Communicator or AIM Handset have
E911? I mean... it LOOKS like a phone, right? So it should have E911. Of
course, if I'm outdoors, they might have GPS built in, but if I'm
downstairs in the mall, with wifi repeaters all around to keep the
signal strong, and just roaming from store to store, how would anyone
ever know where to find me?
These are basic problems for which NO one has a solution. As many
E911-capable VoIP services as there are these days, the simple fact
remains that truly nomadic VoIP does not have the infrastructure yet to
be able to handle E911. And the more flexible we make it, the less
chance we will ever solve that problem without massive redesigns of the
way IP is routed and handled.
Trevor Peirce wrote:
| Quote: | Drew Gibson wrote:
| Quote: | This call was one of the marginal cases and this is the question I was
trying to ask. As with most emergencies, this situation was created by
a combination of failures.
Rightly or wrongly the current situation is that...
1. The customer expects the Telco to take care of 911 entirely, as
they always have in the past.
|
Indeed. The VoIP provider should take a more proactive role to ensure
the customer understands that 911 address != billing address. First,
the regulations require periodic reminders be sent to the customer to
keep their address current. Second, it would be good practice for all
providers to offer to update 911 address at the same time when they are
processing a billing address update.
| Quote: | 2. The VoIP provider expects the customer to update their 911 address,
as the provider cannot strictly control location (except the cable
providers such as Shaw Cable, through which the ambulance was
correctly dispatched)
|
As above. Cable companies have a benefit that they attach their device
to your house so it cannot be moved without them coming out and doing it
for you. Thus, they are allowed to route directly to a PSAP and use
E911. VoIP is not allowed to do this per CRTC regulations.
| Quote: | I'll leave it to the lawyers to apportion blame but, in the mean time,
how is this disconnect being addressed by VoIP and 911 service providers?
|
In my opinion the address not being updated is a very small factor of
the failure at hand. The bigger failure is the lack of communication to
verify the caller's address or let them speak to the PSAP directly. If
the caller did speak to the PSAP, or if the caller told the person on
the phone that the old address was correct, then the point of failure
shifts from the VoIP provider/911 termination partner to the caller.
However, it is my understanding that the address was not verified with
the caller and that the caller never spoke to the PSAP, and that is why
this happened.
The current implemented system in Canada has room for improvement, but
the processes required by law does work fine and requires several stages
that would have prevented this failure if they had been followed by all
involved parties. It will be interesting to find out the details of
what exactly went wrong.
Because of this failure, here is today's article recommending against
VoIP services:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/05/rethinking-voip.htm
|
|
|
I still strongly believe is not a voip only responsibility
may be I am being naive here,
but if not provided by the registrar
why don't enforce all VoIP devices to have to configure by firmware a fail-over 911 routing,
(with the due 911 counterpart from 911 services)
all will be fixed to something like [url=sip:911@911.gov.us]sip:911@911.gov.us[/url] (or ca)
and you get to enter some data like location,
doable things @ 911:
some IP mapping when receiving
yearly auto call to confirm location field
test site to test, confirm location, and enable service (like [url=sip:911@test.911.gov.us]sip:911@test.911.gov.us[/url])
ask where are you? if voip call
(happens with cells too, some calls appear as originating from different cities)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sip at arcdiv.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 12:37 pm Post subject: [asterisk-biz] VoIP 9-1-1 failure - don't let it happen to y |
|
|
Peter Beckman wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 6 May 2008, SIP wrote:
| Quote: | Neither of which are terribly effective. GPS is rather unreliable
indoors, and if you're truly on the move, having your phone stop working
every time you switch APs until you reconfirm your location (which you
may not even know) is, perhaps, a worthless solution.
|
The ISPs could provide IP-to-Address mapping for dynamic IP assignments.
The ISP knows who the customer is (at least in theory, technically) when
they dole out an IP to them, and if the service is something like FIOS,
DSL or another physical entity, the ISP should be able to provide
registered ISPs a service where the IP can be queried for the address, and
potentially matched to the data provided, or maybe even as a trusted
source of the data.
While technically pheasable, and with most of the ISPs having been phone
companies both currently and in a past life, and their knowledge and
experience with providing 911 services in the past where people didn't
have to tell the phone company where they were, it would probably take the
Government to take action to force the ISPs to do this. And even then, I
know there are people on the list capable of shooting holes in this as
well.
I do like the GPS idea, but make it aGPS. You don't need to have service
with a wireless carrier in order to listen to the signal or talk to the
tower. If you know where the tower is, you can get a decent idea where
you are +/- 1 mile and push the call to the right 911 center. But then
again, sure, if you are in the boonies with no cell towers, you are hosed.
But if the ATA can pick up a signal, and it DOES get a GPS fix, it should
be able to pass that or be query-able.
| Quote: | These are basic problems for which NO one has a solution.
|
That's because there is no good one-size-fits-all solution. What I've
thrown out is just more of a "it might work in some cases" solution. This
is a complex problem, and nobody has an easy solution. I think the best
solution will be a combination of technical solutions and good testing.
There really should be a new number, "912" that routes like 911 except to
a recording that states the location you would reach if you dialed 911,
and the information they have on file (or passed in the call). Easy to
verify, easy (well, maybe) to implement, and no operators annoyed with
"test" calls.
Beckman
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Beckman Internet Guy
beckman@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Right... that's mostly what I meant by no one has a solution and it
would require architecture changes. One could assign a physical location
to every access point, and be required through some trickery of
currently non-existent protocols to pass that information onto the PSAP.
But then you have the privacy people worrying about whether or not this
constant tracking information could be obtained and used by stalkers.
And once you bring a technology like WiMax into play with a theoretical
(and I am aware of its current limits in practical installations) range
of 30 miles, then what? A 60-mile diameter circle is a big area in which
to get lost without any possibility for triangulation. At that point,
you'd have to rely on GPS (if not in a city with high buildings or a
wooded area filled with trees), which adds in yet another thing that
could go wrong.
This is the real issue with VoIP and E911 -- the infrastructure.
Wireline phone is easy for E911. It stays in one place. Its circuit is a
known location. Cell towers have a limited range, can triangulate if
necessary (for scenarios in which GPS wouldn't work), and when outdoors,
you have the GPS option. And there are cell towers EVERYwhere. IP,
however, is nebulous from its very architectural design. It was built
that way intentionally. This makes for protocols which travel over IP to
be somewhat nebulous by nature.
Unless we radically change the variables involved, I'm afraid it will
only get MORE nebulous, not less so. We may solve one problem now, but
be faced with another in 10 years and another 5 years after that, etc, etc.
N.
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Search
