Subject: [dhcwg] New ID for DHC Option to supply Emergency Dialstring

From: "James M. Polk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 18:17:07 -0600

DHC WG

I have written a new ID into this WG calling for a new Option to download 
the local emergency calling dialstring, with country code, and a service 
identifier (for countries that have more than one emergency 
dialstring).  It can be viewed here:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-polk-dhc-emergency-dialstring-option-00.txt 

This option has local significance that normal voice or video or instant 
messaging device registration doesn't provide, an aspect of local 
connectivity.  This information could be used to add to a device's 
digit-map for what number or numbers constitute an emergency call attempt.

Your comments are appreciated

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

---

From: "James M. Polk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 11:05:38 -0600

Peter

Thanks for the support on this.

I defined the ISO country code because it is universal.  That said, I am 
open a more granular jurisdictional identifier, either expanding the 
country code, or adding another field to the message (which can be null in 
some/most cases).  Do you have any suggestions where I can find such a 
identifier that would be understood?  Or would you like it to be more of a 
hierarchical in nature?  An example of this could be
         country code =  US
         state code = TX

in such a way that each country can be divided up as that country is 
divided up.  For Canada, they have "territories" and not states... and so 
on. I'm open to this division - but we're getting close to duplicating the 
civic option (coming soon), though there isn't the absolute binding between 
that option and this one necessarily.

Taking this the other way, I agree completely that a continent code is 
useful, and am not sure if something between the 7 continents and the 
countries within any of the continent makes sense.

comments?

At 11:40 AM 3/23/2006 -0500, [email-masked] wrote:

>Hi James, list,
>
>Not clear if this is the right list, but here goes....   A couple of 
>things.
>
>One, I like this approach and think it is potentially very useful even 
>outside of what we would normally think of as public emergency calling (eg 
>E911, ECRIT etc).  Inside an enterprise it could also be highly useful to 
>convey the appropriate strings to use for site-specific emergency calls 
>within the enterprise, for example the security desk, chemical spill team, 
>etc.  DHCP makes a lot of sense for this, since it is driven at layer 2 
>and hence is naturally geographically scoped appropriately, and is also 
>universally well understood by network administrators.
>
>Second, I have some technical concerns on the format as currently 
>proposed, related to countrycode.  It seems to me there may be countries 
>where additional jurisdictional sub-divisions (eg state, county) would be 
>required to resolve meaning of particular service IDs and related dial 
>string, within that region.  Possibly there could be larger regions as 
>well, such as EU vs a specific country within the EU.  I'm concerned there 
>could be region-specific cases where: i) there could be a different string 
>value for the same service type, ii) a different service type for the same 
>string or iii) service types and strings that are applicable only in some 
>regions.  If you consider also using this for similar applications within 
>an enterprise, then I think finer granularity would also be required.  (I 
>reserve the right to change my mind on the latter point, or have someone 
>else change it for me.)  These are certainly not i nsurmountable concerns.
>
>Peter Blatherwick
>
>
>
>"James M. Polk" <[email-masked]>
>
>09.03.06 19:17
>
>         To:        [email-masked]
>         cc:        [email-masked]
>         Subject:        [dhcwg] New ID for DHC Option to supply Emergency 
> Dialstring
>
>
>DHC WG
>

---

From: "MORAND Lionel RD-CORE-ISS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 21:04:42 +0100

Hi James,

I have a more basic question about the "country code" field. What is exactly the use of this country code? I was thinking that the DHCP server was providing "local" emergency numbers. So what is it needed to add the country code in the option? Basic question as I said... ;)

Lionel

-----Message d'origine-----
De : James M. Polk [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Envoyé : jeudi 23 mars 2006 18:06
À : [email-masked]
Cc : [email-masked]
Objet : Re: [dhcwg] New ID for DHC Option to supply Emergency Dialstring

Peter

I defined the ISO country code because it is universal.  That said, I am open a more granular jurisdictional identifier, either expanding the country code, or adding another field to the message (which can be null in some/most cases).  Do you have any suggestions where I can find such a identifier that would be understood?  Or would you like it to be more of a hierarchical in nature?  An example of this could be
         country code =  US
         state code = TX

in such a way that each country can be divided up as that country is divided up.  For Canada, they have "territories" and not states... and so on. I'm open to this division - but we're getting close to duplicating the civic option (coming soon), though there isn't the absolute binding between that option and this one necessarily.

Taking this the other way, I agree completely that a continent code is useful, and am not sure if something between the 7 continents and the countries within any of the continent makes sense.

comments?

At 11:40 AM 3/23/2006 -0500, [email-masked] wrote:

>outside of what we would normally think of as public emergency calling 
>(eg E911, ECRIT etc).  Inside an enterprise it could also be highly 
>useful to convey the appropriate strings to use for site-specific 
>emergency calls within the enterprise, for example the security desk, 
>chemical spill team, etc.  DHCP makes a lot of sense for this, since it 
>is driven at layer 2 and hence is naturally geographically scoped 
>appropriately, and is also universally well understood by network administrators.
>
>proposed, related to countrycode.  It seems to me there may be 
>countries where additional jurisdictional sub-divisions (eg state, 
>county) would be required to resolve meaning of particular service IDs 
>and related dial string, within that region.  Possibly there could be 
>larger regions as well, such as EU vs a specific country within the EU.  
>I'm concerned there could be region-specific cases where: i) there 
>could be a different string value for the same service type, ii) a 
>different service type for the same string or iii) service types and 
>strings that are applicable only in some regions.  If you consider also 
>using this for similar applications within an enterprise, then I think 
>finer granularity would also be required.  (I reserve the right to 
>change my mind on the latter point, or have someone else change it for me.)  These are certainly not i nsurmountable concerns.
>
>Peter Blatherwick
>
>
>
>I have written a new ID into this WG calling for a new Option to 
>download the local emergency calling dialstring, with country code, and 
>a service identifier (for countries that have more than one emergency 
>This option has local significance that normal voice or video or 
>instant messaging device registration doesn't provide, an aspect of 
>local connectivity.  This information could be used to add to a 
>device's digit-map for what number or numbers constitute an emergency call attempt.
>

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:17:11 -0500

Hi James, 

Yes, I do think it is a useful thing.  (I would especialy like to 
implement the "cat stuck in a tree" emergency dial number ;-)

> ... Do you have any suggestions where I can find such a 
> identifier that would be understood?

I was thinking it could be derived from the same set of identifiers (ca 
types) as used in the geopriv-dhcp-civil work.  It already has a hierarchy 
of sorts, and is defined pretty independently of what the various levels 
of territory are called locally (both state and province are just national 
subdivisions for example).  Each type would give as much of the possible 
identifiers as are needed for correct scope.  (Usually, it would just be 
country i expect, for public services.)  One advantage of this (other than 
thought reuse) would be that the two could be compared to determine what 
is currently applicable.

Not sure just what could be used for something bigger than country, unless 
there are actually ISO definitions for EU or others. 

-- Peter

23.03.06 12:05

        To:     [email-masked]
        cc:     [email-masked]
        Subject:        Re: [dhcwg] New ID for DHC Option to supply Emergency  Dialstring

Peter

civic option (coming soon), though there isn't the absolute binding 
between 
that option and this one necessarily.

comments?

>outside of what we would normally think of as public emergency calling 
(eg