A Framework for Supporting Emergency Telecommunications Services (ETS) within a Single Administrative Domain
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <email@example.com> To: IETF-Announce <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Internet Architecture Board <email@example.com>, RFC Editor <firstname.lastname@example.org>, ieprep mailing list <email@example.com>, ieprep chair <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Document Action: 'A Framework for Supporting Emergency Telecommunications Services (ETS) Within a Single Administrative Domain' to Informational RFC The IESG has approved the following document: - 'A Framework for Supporting Emergency Telecommunications Services (ETS) Within a Single Administrative Domain ' <draft-ietf-ieprep-domain-frame-09.txt> as an Informational RFC This document is the product of the Internet Emergency Preparedness Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Jon Peterson and Cullen Jennings. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ieprep-domain-frame-09.txt
Technical Summary This document presents a framework discussing the role of various protocols andmechanisms that could be considered candidates for supporting Emergency Telecommunication Services (ETS) within a single administrative domain. Comments about their potential usage as well as their current deployment are provided to the reader. Specific solutions are not presented. Working Group Summary The IEPREP WG supported the advancement of this document. Protocol Quality This document was reviewed for the IESG by Jon Peterson. Note to RFC Editor Section 3.1 OLD: A more ambitious way of supporting the mobile user is through the use of the Mobile IP (MIP) protocol. In this case and at the IP level, foreign networks introduce the concept of triangle routing and the potential for multiple access points and service context within a subnetwork. In addition, policy plays a critical role in dictating the measure of available services to the mobile user. The beaconing capability of MIP allows it to offer a measure of application transparent mobility as a mobile host (MH) moves from one subnetwork to another. However, this feature may not be available in most domains. In addition, its management requirements may discourage its widespread deployment and use. Hence, users should probably not rely on its existence, but rather may want to expect a more simpler approach based on DHCP as described above. The subject of mobile IP is discussed below in Section 4. NEW: A more ambitious way of supporting the mobile user is through the use of the Mobile IP (MIP) protocol. MIP offers a measure of application transparent mobility as a mobile host moves from one subnetwork to another while keeping the same stable IP address registered at a global anchor point. However, this feature may not always be available or in use. In any case, where it is in use, at least some of the packets destined to and from the mobile host go through the home network.