Subject: [p2p-sip] P2P and 911 (again)

From: ppatrick at pacwest.com (Philip Patrick)
Date: Wed Aug 17 18:30:55 2005

Richard,

Remember that many PSAPs will continue with POTS service for some time perhaps for long time depending on their funding.  During the interim, the p2p provider needs to provide a means of locating the appropriate PSAP and routing P2P VoIP 911 calls to the PSAP via the PSTN.  So P2P provider access to emergency services will likely be a real issue and for how long no one knows.

Phil

-----Original Message-----
From: Stastny Richard [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 3:10 PM
To: Juha Heinanen; Tschofenig, Hannes
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [p2p-sip] P2P and 911 (again)

Juha,
 
you are at the point. Emergency services in future requires the
provision of location information to the end-users device by the 
access providers as an obligation. there will be no obligations
anymore to the application service providers, because in this case
the device may access the PSAP directly.
 
A gsm/3g provider is nothing else than just an access provider
like a DSL or cable provider, a WiFi hot spot or WiMAX.
This message has to be conveyed to the regulators, especially
in Europe.
 
so the whole discussion if p2p provider have to provide access
to emergency services is needless, they will not be they one 
haveing obligations
 
-richard

________________________________

Von: [email-masked] im Auftrag von Juha Heinanen
Gesendet: Mi 17.08.2005 15:37
An: Tschofenig, Hannes
Cc: [email-masked]
Betreff: [p2p-sip] P2P and 911 (again)

Tschofenig, Hannes writes:

 > 1) the end host is able to use a mapping protocol to locate the psap.
 > the uri of the psap is determined based on the location of the end
 > host.

if p2p sip client is in gsm/3g device, it could calculate its own
location provided that it knows coordinates of available gsm/3g base
stations.

i once suggested to authorities in finland that every mobile operator is
mandated to publish coordinates of their base stations on the internet.
this was rejected due to desire of mobile operators to hide such
information.

this is yet another example of the walled garden philosophy of mobile
operators.  they don't want to give control to intelligent p2p end
devices.

perhaps fcc in the u.s., if, as they claim, take emergency calling
seriously, could publish such ruling as an example to european
regulators.  if not, the only conclusion one can make, is that all this
fuzz about emergency calling is nothing but joke and in the end the only
thing that really matters is commercial interests of walled garden
operators.

-- juha
_______________________________________________
p2p-sip mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/p2p-sip

_______________________________________________
p2p-sip mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/p2p-sip