Transcript VON06s-regulatory - Computer Science, Columbia University

Henning Schulzrinne
Dept. of Computer Science
Columbia University
Regulatory Issues: Emergency Calling
The Big Picture
sockets
RJ-45
enterprise
consumer ISP
OS vendors
software
services
Yahoo iTunes
Google MSN
mySpace Skype
eBay
enterprise
consumer ISP
• Future regulatory network
architecture
– regulatory
“interfaces”
– avoid
“telecommunication”
vs. “information
services”
• Affects everything:
– network neutrality
– emergency calling
– NGN discussions
services & applications
(HTTP, SIP, RTSP, …)
ISP
(IP, DHCP, DNS)
network access
(fiber, copper,
wireless)
natural
monopoly or
oligopoly
geographic
range
Components of emergency calling
Contact well-known
number or identifier
Route call to locationappropriate PSAP
Deliver precise location
to call taker to dispatch
emergency help
PSTN
transition
(“I2”)
end-to-end IP
(“NG911”)
112
911
112
911
dial 112, 911
 urn:service:sos
selective
router
VPC
LoST:
phone
number 
location
(ALI lookup)
in-band  key
 location
in-band
(service,location)  URL
The core emergency calling problem
Voice Service Provider (VSP)
sees emergency call
but does not know caller location
ISP/IAP knows user location
but does not handle call
UA recognition & UA resolution
DHCP (w/loc)
LLDP-MED (L2)
GPS (outdoors)
mapping
location  URL
9-11
leonianj.gov
INVITE sip:[email protected]
To: urn:service:sos
INVITE sip:[email protected]
To: urn:service:sos
<location>
<location>
LUMP architecture
G
tree guide
G
G
G
T1: .us
G
broadcast (gossip)
T2: .de
resolver
seeker
313 Westview
Leonia, NJ US
T2
T1
(.us)
Leonia, NJ  sip:[email protected]
(.de)
T3
(.dk)
Regulatory issue 1: location access
• Location information is necessary for emergency call
routing
• Consumer access to location information
– DSL and cable provider have best knowledge of
customer location
• all other methods are much more expensive, have
lower resolution or work only in densely populated
areas (e.g., 802.11 triangulation)
– But consumer may use non-ILEC/MSO voice provider
• visitors may bring their own devices
• 802.11 access to neighbor’s modem in emergency
– Non-discrimination against
Regulatory issue 2: MSAG & ALI data
• MSAG = master-street address guide
– contains all street addresses and their ESNs
– usually maintained by PSAP and local authorities
• ALI = mapping of phone numbers to locations
– needed if PSTN phones are part of the all-IP solution
• Sometimes held or managed by ILEC or database vendors
– possibly unclear data ownership
– need open access by ISPs and VSPs
– for visitors, VSP may not be in same country
Regulatory issue 3: 911 funding
•
•
•
Only US (AFAIK) uses phone tax to fund parts of PSAP operation
– but not everywhere in the US
– rates vary widely and non-local collection difficult
– money often becomes part of general fund or funds police
cruisers
– should tax on water be used to fund the fire department?
Old model is a “family tax”
– each line pays
– each family member with a cell phone pays
–  regressive
Old model no longer works for IP communications
–  no longer works if people switch to multiple providers, nonlocal operators
– register phone in non-tax state  enforcement mechanism for
$12/year?
911 funding: goals and requirements
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Encourage availability of 9-1-1 on as many devices as possible
– multiple devices per person
– intermittently-used devices (car, home entertainment systems)
– corporate end users
Sustainable funding model
Limit incentives for bypass
– e.g., by registering service in no-fee areas or using non-US VSP
(e.g., Skype)
Avoid distortion of telecom competition
– e.g., by only making 9-1-1 available to some providers
Low cost to collect and administer
– including compliance
Fees accrue to area where payer is located
– even if billing address is somewhere else
Minimize opportunities for tax “repurposing”
– i.e., “9-1-1” fee becomes part of general revenue
Desirable: tax fairness
– income-based rather than head tax
911 funding: possibilities
•
•
•
•
Per-household fee
– e.g., similar to vehicle taxes
– could be collected by ISP or wireless provider
– show proof of payment to service provider
– somewhat tedious for user
General revenue (including sales tax)
– public safety is a core government function
– emergency calling is a core component of public safety
• not that many call boxes left
Local tax revenue
– in some cases, only about $12/household/year, i.e., 0.5% of
typical NJ property taxes 
Homeowner’s insurance surtax
– clearly reflects residence of payer
911 funding: problems
• Don’t have good estimate for current income stream
– wireless & wireline
– local taxes
• Don’t have good estimates of capex and opex for running
9-1-1 system
• Unclear how new technical structures will change
balance of local vs. regional infrastructure
– e.g., state-wide data sharing or call routing
Regulatory issue 4: transition
•
•
•
conservative: wait until the last analog phone is disconnected
– in 2050?
no-offense: run two systems in parallel
– another “trunk” (IP) into the PSAP PBX
– possible, but requires integration for GIS
– may limit functionality
– doesn’t solve PSAP reliability and situational awareness problems
forward-looking: convert to all IP-PSAPs ASAP
– convert CAMA trunks from selective router via gateway
– simplifies Phase II transition (& possibly cheaper)
– allows better redundancy and better support for deaf callers
Summary
• Technical issues for NG911 are solvable, but require
regulatory assistance:
– right to location
– right to MSAG and ALI data
– right funding model
– encourage early transition
• Slides at shurl.net/xJ or url.fm/24z