The Jeff Pulver Blog: 'Help! I Need Somebody!'...But do we really need Somebody to Micromanage Emergency Response Solutions for IP-Based Communications?

« April 27th issue of the Pulver Report just released | Main | Guest Blogger: Timothy D. Jasionowski - re: is SIP dead? »

April 27, 2005

'Help! I Need Somebody!'...But do we really need Somebody to Micromanage Emergency Response Solutions for IP-Based Communications?

Last night I read with some concern several news accounts of a comment FCC Chairman Martin made yesterday regarding application of emergency response obligations on VoIP service providers.

Now, to be clear, I have no problem with the adoption of appropriately-tailored rules establishing guidelines for implementation of an emergency response system for IP-based communications providers. Who could argue with the promotion of such a public good? As I've said repeatedly, IP technology will allow for the establishment of next-generation emergency response capabilities that will dwarf anything we currently see on traditional telecom networks.

In fact, the Global IP Alliance, which I helped to found, is now taking the lead to develop a global IP-based Emergency Response System. It is my hope that this global effort will allow users to hit a single button and immediately activate appropriate language translations, notify appropriate points of contact and emergency responders, transmit individualized medical histories and special circumstances, etc.

New rules designed in such a way so as not to disrupt new technology and services but ensure the public good should be acceptable to both industry and government. Cookie-cutter application of old rules to IP-based communications, however, could tend to stifle new technology and innovation and interfere with the ability of IP-based communications providers to develop superior emergency response systems.

My preference of course is that industry take the lead to develop non-proprietary emergency response systems that are most suitable to promotion of IP technology while promoting the broadest public good. Short of that, I would hope that regulators, as they inject their authority over IP-based communications, look at IP technology with a fresh eye and an understanding of the differences between IP-based communications and traditional telecom networks.

One area where I think it is appropriate for government intervention would be to ensure that unaffiliated IP-based communications providers have access to the "selective routers" and other infrastructure currently controlled largely by incumbent carriers. I would hate to think that those that control necessary infrastructure could stand in the way of establishment of a workable emergency response capability by IP-based communications providers. Certainly, lives should not be lost so that certain providers might be able to maintain a competitive advantage or point to the inadequate capabilities of unaffiliated IP-based communications providers.

Another area for government oversight would be to ensure that PSAPs do not block the use of administrative access lines for nomadic emergency response services. These administrative access lines provide a critical interim solution while the IP-based communications industry moves forward rapidly to develop the technological means for the provision of emergency services to nomadic end users.

I'm curious to see the fruits of Chairman Martin's statement and I trust that he will not simply "react" to current fears as he and his colleagues weigh in on emergency response solutions that might implicate IP-based communications. Any regulator involvement must continue to promote innovation and advance the promise of IP-based communications while simultaneously promoting the public good and allowing IP technology to improve emergency response solutions.

Share this post:

Posted by jeff on April 27, 2005 10:24 PM | Permalink

Additional resources: Watch PrimeTime TV Shows | Watch the Jeff Pulver Show | Jeff's Qik Videos

Comments

hrt

http://www.param.com.cn/ 同声传译
http://www.dingmai.com/tsfysb.htm 同声翻译设备
http://www.apu.cn/wjg.html 文件柜
http://www.dingmai.com/hysbzl.htm 会议设备租赁
http://www.dingmai.com/ 同声传译设备租赁
http://www.dingmai.com/biaojue.htm 表决器租赁
http://www.apu.cn/ggyg.html 更衣柜
http://www.sdggc.com/ 钢管
http://www.bjseek.com.cn/ 服务器数据恢复
http://www.lunwenok.com/ 论文发表
http://www.jnlongwei.com.cn/ 升降机
http://www.jndmt.com/ 升降机
http://www.jndmt.com/ 升降平台
http://www.jndmt.com/ 登车桥
http://www.huabeipingtai.cn/ 升降机
http://www.huabeipingtai.cn/ 铝合金升降机
http://www.huabeipingtai.cn/ 液压升降机
http://www.huabeipingtai.cn/products.asp 液压机械
http://www.huabeipingtai.cn/products.asp 升降平台
http://www.huabeipingtai.cn/products.asp 升降台
http://www.huabeipingtai.cn/products.asp 高空作业平台
http://www.boweiyeya.com/ 升降机
http://www.boweiyeya.com/ 升降平台
http://www.tanhuangdaquan.cn/ 弹簧
http://www.bjseek.com.cn/ 数据恢复
http://www.bjseek.com.cn/ RAID数据恢复
http://www.sdggc.com/ 无缝管
http://www.sdggc.com/ 无缝钢管
http://www.wowoblog.com 博客
http://jglsx.blog.hexun.com/ Google排名
http://www.zjchaoyi.com/ 网站优化
http://www.lmxlzx.com 心理咨询
http://www.lmxlzx.com 北京心理咨询
http://www.itemchannel.com/ WOW Gold
http://www.itemchannel.com/ WOWGold
http://www.itemchannel.com World Of Warcraft Gold
http://www.itemchannel.com/?op=powerlevel WOW Power Leveling
http://www.itemchannel.com/?op=powerlevel WOW PowerLeveling
http://www.itemchannel.com/?op=powerlevel World Of Warcraft Power Leveling
http://www.itemchannel.com/?op=powerlevel World Of Warcraft PowerLeveling
http://www.gasalarm.org/ Breathalyzer
http://www.gasalarm.org/ Gas Alarm
http://www.gasalarm.org/ Breathalyser
http://www.gasalarm.org/co-alarm.htm Co Alarm
http://www.gasalarm.org/gas-detector.htm Co Detector
http://www.gasalarm.org/alcohol-tester.htm Alcohol Tester
http://www.gasalarm.org/product/alcoholtester/alcohol-tester-126.htm Alcohol Tester
http://www.gasalarm.org/gas-detector.htm Gas Detectorgh

Posted by: 升降机 at July 14, 2008 05:56 AM

Jeff,

I have just stumbled across the blog. How much progress has been made in Emergency Response system as of today? VoIp is growing every day and reaching new markets. Some rural areas are still unreached for E911 calls. But intranetworking back to the main site that can be one solution. We have found the Mitel platform to be ahead of it's competitors in providing emergency response to users. the "one button" is a reality, here's how: Example - take education with the shootings that keep happening around the U.S. emergency notification to staff and students is of utmost importance. and the Mitel can do that by pushing the "panic button" or "one button" literally and sending notification to users' handsets, cell phones, pda,'s, and email. As you stated VoIP will be the standard in a few more years.

Posted by: Dean B at May 7, 2008 03:11 PM

Old entry I know, but I have become 're-engaged' recently and have comments....

It seems to me that any solutions that depend upon the location of infrastructure vs the device the user is using - are flawed. The only way to know where someone is, today, is via GPS lat, long, and altitude. Discussions of router locations and access line definitions are simply stop-gap measures (and uninteresting) until we can attain a REAL solution.

GPS receivers are built into many new cell phones in preparation for use of such information in the event of an emergency. This should be the solution for ALL devices to be used in such a manner, not just 'cell phones'. PCs, 'fixed' phones, etc., should all have such location determination capabilities.

That being established (unless I'm 'smoking my socks', as a collegue would put it), we should begin discussions on how a message is formatted and how and where it is delivered. Don't know how to acheive common initiation of emergency services notification (one-touch, etc.) - being that all devices work differently this may be best left as an exercise for the device manufacturers.

We'll need message integrity and routing gaurantees to ensure proper service is acheived and to help eliminate nuisense or destructive messages.

Also, given how long its taken TV manufacturers to migrate to HDTV - we'll need to ensure similar mistakes are not made in the GPS requirement for communication devices.

And just for kicks - lets make it global/internantional in nature (did someone mention language interpretation? ;). Based upon your location you get routed to the correct EMS provider, if available. That way anyone can travel to other countries and use consistant methods for accessing EMS. Obviously, these things take time - but all the more reason to start now.

Posted by: GolfinGuy at August 10, 2005 02:15 PM

geoofery the horse says hello to the ip computer man.

neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Posted by: geoffery the hungry horse at July 8, 2005 04:46 PM

I totally agree with the opinion that the IP access provider should deliver the geographic position of the IP address. There are several reasons for this. 1) Voice (VoIP, IP telephony) is only one of the applications och communications forms that can make use of this information. In the future, several other applications and other media could be used to make "emergency calls" - like instant messages, or video and provide a better service to the public.
2) Only the access providers have a reliable information about the actual location of an IP access.

Posted by: Zoltan at May 28, 2005 04:51 AM

Let's first define what you mean by ISP? By far the largest providers of broadband Internet access are the BOCs and MSOs. Never mind the fact that most dialup providers have no competitive options (of which is another topic of its own) to provide broadband unless they flip to wireless, but unlikely for the majority.

As a former owner of a dialup ISP, I'm all for innovation, new products and services. But I feel the burden of providing E911 should fall on the provider of the application.

E911 has become a standard and expected feature of the "traditional" PSTN network. Until VoIP is completely emancipated from the "PSTN", it may need to compromise and deal with the "old system" and the tens of millions still using PSTN.

Posted by: Frank Muto at April 30, 2005 05:51 PM

Frank:

No. At least that was not my intention. Am I missing something? There might be logistical problems; ISPs may not want to take on this new responsibility. But structurally I think it makes sense. We are replacing access to the telephone communications network with access to Internet communications network. I am suggesting that instead of viewing all telephone regulations to be levied on voice service provider, we should view whether it is levied on access provider or applications provider and then map them to ISPs or VoIP service provider.

From your question, I am way off. I am open for an education.

Posted by: Aswath at April 30, 2005 07:30 AM

Aswath, you are joking right?

Posted by: Frank Muto at April 30, 2005 12:05 AM

I think we should not interpret "one button" literally. Did Jeff mean a iniversal way to invoke emergency service?

More importantly, we should discuss whether access to emergency service is the job of the internet access provider or the application service provider. In other words, when I invoke access to emergency service, the ISP should connect me to the appropriate point of contact and then the end points can decide on the set of application(s) to use for that session. Focusing on VoIP service providers is also another instance of applying old thinking to the new system.

Posted by: Aswath at April 29, 2005 10:33 AM

Jeff, I am concerned about a phrase (one button) you mentioned in your comments. You have been a major supporter providing important advice and contributions to resolving enhanced emergency service access (E9-1-1 in the US and Canada)issues related to VoIP, over the past several months. However, your comment about working on a solution using one button on a phone for access, is a potential problem. Some wireless handset manufacturers, without consultation with 9-1-1 experts (such as NENA), built one button access into several phone models. 9-1-1 Centers were inundated with accidental calls--thousands across the country daily, sometimes tying up resources so other calls were either not answered or had delayed answers. It took years of work to reach all the involved manufacturers and have this practice stopped. It remains vitally important that, as companies/people create new solutions and features in this critically-important area, they work with or within organizations, such as NENA, to be sure these advancements are operationally sound and do not have negative side effects. This is an important area within our NG E9-1-1 program, where we have asked companies/entities, including those which have not been actively involved in traditional 9-1-1 with products and services, to partner with us in working operational, technical and policy issues surrounding our next generation of enhanced emergency services access. Again, thanks so much for your tremendous assistance as we advance and provide life-saving access throughout the world.

Posted by: Rick Jones at April 28, 2005 08:20 PM

April 27, 2005

'Help! I Need Somebody!'...But do we really need Somebody to Micromanage Emergency Response Solutions for IP-Based Communications?

Comments

Post a comment