Re: SIMPLE and Emergency Services

On 11/1/12 11:44 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
> Release 11 of 3GPP IMS specifications add session based media to
> emergency call usage in addition to voice and real time text. For
> messaging, that includes MSRP.

PSAPs are going to provide an interesting and motivated testbed for =

SIMPLE interoperability. We know there will be an IMS SIMPLE client to =

the PSAPS. Unless the PSAP sw is built on an IMS platform, that will =

guarantee one point where interop will be required.

	Thanks,
	Paul

> While many countries are trying to ensure that PSAPs can handle SMS
> (which is not session based), this needs to be regarded as something
> that exists where nothing else does =96 as it provides the responder with
> no ability to interrogate the user to obtain more information.
>
> For presence, nothing special has been specified by 3GPP.
>
> Keith
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:*[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
> Behalf Of *Bernard Aboba
> *Sent:* 31 October 2012 22:08
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [Simple] SIMPLE and Emergency Services
>
>
>   *In response to Olle's question about whether SIMPLE is an abject and
>   irredeemable failure,  I would note that SIMPLE is still under
>   consideration for use in emergency services, if only because XMPP
>   isn't yet a viable alternative. For example, both NENA i3 and ECRIT
>   PhoneBCP mention SIMPLE, but refer to XMPP support of emergency
>   services as future work. In emergency scenarios, presence and address
>   books are typically not considered since the PSAP is neither a
>   presentity nor a watcher.  Instead, SIMPLE is used as a way of
>   conveying information between the caller and PSAP, including location,
>   a message body and additional data. *
>
> With SMS to 911 under active discussion with regulatory bodies, the
> question about whether we can rely on SIMPLE for emergency use has
> become a "hot issue". As an example, there has been a suggestion that
> MESSAGE could be used to support conveyance of SMS text messages to a
> "text gateway" that would then pass them on to the PSAP (possibly in a
> different form, such as translating to TTY/TDD).  Not only might this
> help standardize the transport of SMS messages to 911, but it would also
> support future uses of MESSAGE for next generation emergency services.
>
>
>
> While documents like NENAi3 and ECRIT PhoneBCP still point to SIMPLE
> specs, some folks have pointed to the lack of support for MESSAGE in SIP
> trunking services as an indication that even basic uses of SIMPLE are
> unlikely to see much deployment, and that alternatives for disabled
> access to emergency services (such as RFC 4103 realtime text) should be
> given priority.
>
>
>
> IMHO, unless XMPP for emergency uses is specified by IETF in the near
> future, it is likely that SIMPLE will find its way into emergency
> services architectures in some form. Since the IETF is still
> recommending SIMPLE in documents such as ECRIT PhoneBCP, IMHO the IETF
> has a responsibility to public safety to address interop issues that
> will arise in next generation emergency services scenarios. AFAIK,
> SIMPLE interop issues haven't killed anyone yet. Hopefully this will
> remain true in the future.
>
>
>
> Olle E. Johansson said:
>
> "Any other thoughts in regards to SIMPLE?
>
>
>
> Is it a failure or not?
>
>
>
> Do we have a chance of fixing this within the IETF?
>
>
>
> Is anyone interested in fixing it so we actually reach the WG goal of int=
eroperability?"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Simple mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple
>