Subject: Re: [Ecrit] draft-polk-dhc-uri-00

From: Brian Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 18:03:06 -0400

I think a suitable uri for my psap is [email-masked].  That 
implies a state level esrp.  Presumably, that state level psap has 
redundancy, and the duplicate esrps have mechanisms that can forward 
calls to psaps that have made arrangements with the state to get them.

What I worry about is that you may get in a situation where calls are 
being sent to some entity that, for whatever reasons, is unable to 
respond correctly.  This can arise for all sorts of reasons, such as 
loss of connectivity from the folks who need to change its behavior, to 
enough failures that backuos aren't working, to effective partitioning 
of areas requiring actual changes in routing due to failures.

While we try to anticipate such conditions, I don't believe its possible 
to anticipate everything, and its straightforward enough to design the 
system to allow changes in routing dynamically.

So, maybe the psap that was the right route is no longer the right one.  
For example, maybe the city should go to one alternate psap, but 
everything else should go to another.  I don't know, but I do know that 
disaster plans, like war plans, are obsolete the moment the shooting 
starts, and assumptions that you can anticipate what you may need to do 
are almost always wrong.

Brian

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