Minutes for ECRIT at IETF-94
Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies
||Minutes for ECRIT at IETF-94
IETF94 ECRIT Meeting Minutes
09:00-10:00, Wednesday Morning Session, Room 413, November 4th, 2015, Yokohama
5 min * Agenda Bashing, Draft Status Update (Chairs)
10 min * Internet Protocol-based In-Vehicle Emergency Calls (Randall)
10 min * Next-Generation Pan-European eCall (Randall)
10 min * Data-Only Emergency Calls
10 min * Validation of Locations Around a Planned Change
10 min * A LoST extension to return complete and similar location info
5 min * Discussion
Chairs, M. Linsner & R. Marshall unable to make the meeting in person, so
Brian Rosen will stand in as chair for the meeting.
car-crash - submitted on 10/19 for WGLC.
ecall - submitted for WGLC on 10/19.
WGLC is now over for each, chairs will submit if wg supports (need folks to
additional-data - in the RFC Editor's queue.
held-routing - submitted to IESG for publication on 10/28.
milestones - need to go work on these, these are generous, we can really get
these out. Alissa - should not go another IETF cycle. Brian - well along, there
are people needing them, and using them
Okay, car-crash - Randy Gellens
made a dependent draft on ecall, but this for North America
can use other data sets if needed for other regions
also usable for vehicle manufacturers if there is such a leg.
Added a VEDS since last rev.
Believe it's ready for IETF last call.
Alissa - really need someone to do a review (since no WGLC comments came in)
Brian - anybody?
We'll get the chairs to find someone.
ecall - Randy
does talk a little bit about Pan-European
believe 3GPP now has work work items.
Believe ready for IETF Last Call.
Data Only - Brian
Provides a way to take a CAP message (xml data structure, used to announce
emerg. items) e.g., used in cell mechanism to get warnings
gives us a way to take additional data - put together with CAP - and make an
emergency alert w/o media.
Did have comments (xml? schema) from Randy, got lost in transit,
Hannes agrees to merge these changes.
Once done, Randy agreed to review the draft.
Christer also agreed to do a review.
extension to the LoST protocol
examples of why this is necessary
routing changes that have to get done with new houses/neighborhoods added,
is you have a LIS and something changes, there is nothing besides periodic
Swamp validations for routing.
No push mechanism currently exists.
before the planned/change occurs - the advanced date can be used to do the
implementors who built these kinds of things really want this for their
Asking for this to be adopted, and get it out.
Would like to get this adopted and published because the load on the server.
Brian: would like to get this adopted.
Alissa: Would like to get some review from those
Jabber report says two people in the jabber room have read it.
Mary Barnes, and Marc Linsner
Ask for more reviews and send to the list -
Randy will read again and post comments to the list.
Andrew - have the NENA people posted to the list their comments? They should
do so, even if just to say they want it, it's just what were looking for.
similar-location - Brian Rosen
2 uses - one, if an address is missing parts and you can return the missing
examples, didn't supply a state.
didn't supply a county when one is required.
also, in the PIDF-LO we have a Postal Community Name, where a person knows the
PCN, but we really want the regular Community name that should go into the
Second use: "Did you mean" - prompt to the user, when is similar in order to
supply a regular or valid address.
trying to get this correct before the emergency call - because we're trying to
get the right data.
looking for review, begging for review. Will get some NENA folks to review it.
This one, a little more heavy-weight protocol change than the last draft, more
change in the response, as opposed to the request.
Reviews - take some names?
Ben - says I think there are people in the room that want to see work done, so
Alissa - James Winterbottom reviewed long ago, maybe you could ask him to
Marc (jabber) said he would review as well.
Alissa: It would be good to document some of our success stories.
Christine Runnegar: (channeling colleagues at IETF Journal) Yes, yes, please
IETF Journal - we will publish your success story.