| < draft-rosen-ecrit-ecall-05.txt | draft-rosen-ecrit-ecall-06.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECRIT B. Rosen | ECRIT B. Rosen | |||
| Internet-Draft NeuStar, Inc. | Internet-Draft NeuStar, Inc. | |||
| Intended status: Informational H. Tschofenig | Intended status: Informational H. Tschofenig | |||
| Expires: September 13, 2012 Nokia Siemens Networks | Expires: January 16, 2013 Nokia Siemens Networks | |||
| March 12, 2012 | July 15, 2012 | |||
| Internet Protocol-based In-Vehicle Emergency Call | Internet Protocol-based In-Vehicle Emergency Call | |||
| draft-rosen-ecrit-ecall-05.txt | draft-rosen-ecrit-ecall-06.txt | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes how to use a subset of the IETF-based | This document describes how to use a subset of the IETF-based | |||
| emergency call framework for accomplishing emergency calling support | emergency call framework for accomplishing emergency calling support | |||
| in vehicles. Simplifications are possible due to the nature of the | in vehicles. Simplifications are possible due to the nature of the | |||
| functionality that is going to be provided in vehicles with the usage | functionality that is going to be provided in vehicles with the usage | |||
| of GPS. Additionally, further profiling needs to be done regarding | of GPS. Additionally, further profiling needs to be done regarding | |||
| the encoding of location information. | the encoding of location information. | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 36 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 36 ¶ | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
| working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
| Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on September 13, 2012. | This Internet-Draft will expire on January 16, 2013. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
| document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
| (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 19 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 19 ¶ | |||
| drivers often have a poor location-awareness, especially on urban | drivers often have a poor location-awareness, especially on urban | |||
| roads (also during night) and abroad. In the most crucial cases, the | roads (also during night) and abroad. In the most crucial cases, the | |||
| victim(s) may not be able to call because they have been injured or | victim(s) may not be able to call because they have been injured or | |||
| trapped. | trapped. | |||
| In Europe the European Commission has launched the eCall initiative | In Europe the European Commission has launched the eCall initiative | |||
| that may best be described as a user initiated or automatically | that may best be described as a user initiated or automatically | |||
| triggered system to provide notifications to Public Safety Answering | triggered system to provide notifications to Public Safety Answering | |||
| Point's (PSAP), by means of cellular communications, that a vehicle | Point's (PSAP), by means of cellular communications, that a vehicle | |||
| has crashed, and to provide geodetic location information and where | has crashed, and to provide geodetic location information and where | |||
| possible a voice channel to the PSAP. The current specifications | possible a voice channel to the PSAP. At the time of writing the | |||
| being developed to offer the eCall solution are defined to work with | suppor for eCall are focused on legacy technology. This document | |||
| circuit switched telephony. This document details how similar or | details how emergency calls triggered by vehicles can be accomplished | |||
| more extended functionality can be accomplished using IP-based | in an Internet Protocol-based environment. | |||
| mechanisms. | ||||
| This document is organized as follows: Section 2 defines the | This document is organized as follows: Section 2 defines the | |||
| terminology, Section 3 illustrates the required protocol | terminology, Section 3 illustrates the required protocol | |||
| functionality, Section 4 indicates the required data that has to be | functionality, Section 4 indicates the required data that has to be | |||
| transmitted within a PIDF-LO and Section 5 shows an example message | transmitted within a PIDF-LO and Section 5 shows an example message | |||
| exchange. This document concludes with the security considerations | exchange. This document concludes with the security considerations | |||
| in Section 6 and IANA considerations in Section 7. | in Section 6 and IANA considerations in Section 7. | |||
| 2. Terminology | 2. Terminology | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 11 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 11 ¶ | |||
| This document re-uses a lot of the terminology defined in Section 3 | This document re-uses a lot of the terminology defined in Section 3 | |||
| of [9]. | of [9]. | |||
| 3. Protocol Profile | 3. Protocol Profile | |||
| The usage of in-vehicular emergency calls does not require the usage | The usage of in-vehicular emergency calls does not require the usage | |||
| of a Location Configuration Protocol since GPS is used. Furthermore, | of a Location Configuration Protocol since GPS is used. Furthermore, | |||
| since the GPS receiver is permanently turned on it can even provide | since the GPS receiver is permanently turned on it can even provide | |||
| useful information in cases where the car entered a tunnel. | useful information in cases where the car entered a tunnel. | |||
| Consequently, there is no need to discover any LIS. | Consequently, there is no need to discover any Location Information | |||
| Server (LIS). | ||||
| Since the emergency call within the car is either triggered by a | Since the emergency call within the car is either triggered by a | |||
| button or, in most cases, automatically thanks to sensors mounted in | button or, in most cases, automatically thanks to sensors mounted in | |||
| the car there is no need to learn a dial string. This document | the car there is no need to learn a dial string. This document | |||
| registers a separate Service URN, namely 'urn:service:ecall', used | registers a separate Service URN, namely 'urn:service:ecall', used | |||
| specifically for emergency calls that are triggered by vehicles. | specifically for emergency calls that are triggered by vehicles. | |||
| This URN comes with two sub-services to indicate how the emergency | ||||
| call was triggered, namely 'automatic' for cases when the emergency | ||||
| call was triggered due to a crash automatically without any user | ||||
| involvement and 'manual' for cases where a driver or a passenger | ||||
| triggered the emergency call. If the device initiating the emergency | ||||
| call does not allow to differentiate these two cases then the Service | ||||
| URN 'urn:service:ecall' is used. | ||||
| The following list provides information about the sections and | The following list provides information about the sections and | |||
| requires of [2] that are relevant to this specification: | requires of [2] that are relevant to this specification: | |||
| Identifying an emergency call: Emergency calls are detected at the | Identifying an emergency call: Emergency calls are detected at the | |||
| end point, i.e., by the vehicle, and the Service URN | end point, i.e., by the vehicle, and the Service URN | |||
| 'urn:service:ecall' MUST be implemented by the end point and | 'urn:service:ecall' MUST be implemented by the end point and | |||
| recognized by the VSP. The requirements listed in Section 5 of | recognized by the VSP. The requirements listed in Section 5 of | |||
| [2] are therefore irrelevant to this specification, as they deal | [2] are therefore irrelevant to this specification, as they deal | |||
| with identifying an emergency call based on dial strings. | with identifying an emergency call based on dial strings. | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 8 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 20 ¶ | |||
| Signaling of emergency calls: Section 9 of [2] is applicable to this | Signaling of emergency calls: Section 9 of [2] is applicable to this | |||
| document with the following exception: ED-60/AN-25 is not | document with the following exception: ED-60/AN-25 is not | |||
| applicable as HELD is not used. Video and real-time text may be | applicable as HELD is not used. Video and real-time text may be | |||
| supported by end device in the future, although currently not | supported by end device in the future, although currently not | |||
| envisioned. The corresponding text paragraphs are relevant from | envisioned. The corresponding text paragraphs are relevant from | |||
| Section 9 of [2] when support is being provided. Additionally, | Section 9 of [2] when support is being provided. Additionally, | |||
| ED-62 dealing with "SIP signaling requirements for User Agents" is | ED-62 dealing with "SIP signaling requirements for User Agents" is | |||
| simplified as follows. The initial SIP signaling method is an | simplified as follows. The initial SIP signaling method is an | |||
| INVITE request with the following setting: | INVITE request with the following setting: | |||
| 1. The Request URI MUST be the service URN 'urn:service:ecall'. | 1. The Request URI MUST be the service URN 'urn:service:ecall' | |||
| or one of the sub-services. | ||||
| 2. The To header MUST be a service URN 'urn:service:ecall'. | 2. The To header MUST be a service URN | |||
| 'urn:service:ecall.automatic' or one of the sub-services. | ||||
| 3. The From header MUST be present and SHOULD be the AoR of the | 3. The From header MUST be present and SHOULD be the AoR of the | |||
| caller. | caller. | |||
| 4. A Via header MUST be present. | 4. A Via header MUST be present. | |||
| 5. A Contact header MUST be present which MUST be globally | 5. A Contact header MUST be present which MUST be globally | |||
| routable to permit an immediate call-back to the specific | routable to permit an immediate call-back to the specific | |||
| device which placed the emergency call. | device which placed the emergency call. | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 15 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 15 ¶ | |||
| 4. Data Profile | 4. Data Profile | |||
| Due to the requirement for a built-in GPS receiver only geodetic | Due to the requirement for a built-in GPS receiver only geodetic | |||
| location information will be sent within an emergency call. | location information will be sent within an emergency call. | |||
| Furthermore, the number of location shapes is is restricted. Hence, | Furthermore, the number of location shapes is is restricted. Hence, | |||
| the following location shapes of [6] MUST be implemented: 2d and 3d | the following location shapes of [6] MUST be implemented: 2d and 3d | |||
| Point (see Section 5.2.1 of [6]), Circle (see Section 5.2.3 of [6]), | Point (see Section 5.2.1 of [6]), Circle (see Section 5.2.3 of [6]), | |||
| and Ellipsoid (see Section 5.2.7 of [6]). The coordinate reference | and Ellipsoid (see Section 5.2.7 of [6]). The coordinate reference | |||
| systems (CRS) specified in [6] are also mandatory for this document. | systems (CRS) specified in [6] are also mandatory for this document. | |||
| Furthermore, the direction of travel of the vehicle is important for | Furthermore, the direction of travel of the vehicle is important for | |||
| dispatch and hence it MUST be included in the PIDF-LO. The <bearing> | dispatch and hence it MUST be included in the PIDF-LO. The <heading> | |||
| element specified in [7] MUST be supported. | element specified in [7] MUST be supported. | |||
| 5. Example | 5. Example | |||
| Figure 1 shows an emergency call placed from a vehicle whereby | Figure 1 shows an emergency call placed from a vehicle whereby | |||
| location information information is directly attached to the SIP | location information information is directly attached to the SIP | |||
| INVITE message itself. The call is marked as an emergency call using | INVITE message itself. The call is marked as an emergency call using | |||
| the 'urn:service:ecall' service URN and the PSAP of the VoIP provider | the 'urn:service:ecall.automatic' service URN and the PSAP of the | |||
| determines which PSAP to contact based on the provided location | VoIP provider determines which PSAP to contact based on the provided | |||
| information. As shown in the figure, this route determination may be | location information. As shown in the figure, this route | |||
| based on LoST. Then, the emergency call continues towards the PSAP | determination may be based on LoST. Then, the emergency call | |||
| and in this example it hits the ESRP, as the entry point to the PSAP | continues towards the PSAP and in this example it hits the ESRP, as | |||
| operators emergency services network. Finally, the emergency call | the entry point to the PSAP operators emergency services network. | |||
| will be received by a call taker and first reponders will be | Finally, the emergency call will be received by a call taker and | |||
| dispatched. | first reponders will be dispatched. | |||
| +--------+ | +--------+ | |||
| | LoST | | | LoST | | |||
| | Servers| | | Servers| | |||
| +--------+ | +--------+ | |||
| ^ +-------+ | ^ +-------+ | |||
| | | PSAP2 | | | | PSAP2 | | |||
| | +-------+ | | +-------+ | |||
| v | v | |||
| +-------+ +------+ +-------+ | +-------+ +------+ +-------+ | |||
| Vehicle ------>| Proxy |---->| ESRP |---->| PSAP1 |-----> Call-Taker | Vehicle ------>| Proxy |---->| ESRP |---->| PSAP1 |-----> Call-Taker | |||
| +-------+ +------+ +-------+ | +-------+ +------+ +-------+ | |||
| +-------+ | +-------+ | |||
| | PSAP3 | | | PSAP3 | | |||
| +-------+ | +-------+ | |||
| Figure 1: Example of In-Vehicular Emergency Call Message Flow | Figure 1: Example of In-Vehicular Emergency Call Message Flow | |||
| The following example, in Figure 2, shows location information | The following example, in Figure 2, shows the SIP INVITE and location | |||
| encoded in a PIDF-LO that is being conveyed in such an emergency | information encoded in a PIDF-LO that is being conveyed in such an | |||
| call. | emergency call. | |||
| INVITE urn:service:ecall.automatic SIP/2.0 | ||||
| To: <sip:intermediate-psap@example.com> | ||||
| From: <sip:+13145551111@example.com>;tag=9fxced76sl | ||||
| Call-ID: 3848276298220188511@atlanta.example.com | ||||
| Geolocation: <cid:target123@example.com> | ||||
| Geolocation-Routing: no | ||||
| Accept: application/sdp, application/pidf+xml | ||||
| CSeq: 31862 INVITE | ||||
| Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundary1 | ||||
| Content-Length: ... | ||||
| --boundary1 | ||||
| Content-Type: application/sdp | ||||
| ...Session Description Protocol (SDP) goes here | ||||
| --boundary1 | ||||
| Content-Type: application/pidf+xml | ||||
| Content-ID: <target123@atlanta.example.com> | ||||
| <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> | |||
| <presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf" | ||||
| xmlns:gp="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10" | <presence | |||
| xmlns:gml="http://www.opengis.net/gml" | xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf" | |||
| xmlns:gs="http://www.opengis.net/pidflo/1.0" | xmlns:dm="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:data-model" | |||
| entity="pres:vehicle-identification@example.com"> | xmlns:gp="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10" | |||
| <device id="123"> | xmlns:dyn="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf:geopriv10:dynamic" | |||
| xmlns:gml="http://www.opengis.net/gml" | ||||
| xmlns:gs="http://www.opengis.net/pidflo/1.0" | ||||
| entity="sip:+13145551111@example.com"> | ||||
| <dm:device id="123"> | ||||
| <gp:geopriv> | <gp:geopriv> | |||
| <gp:location-info> | <gp:location-info> | |||
| <gs:Circle srsName="urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG::4326"> | <gml:Point srsName="urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG::4326"> | |||
| <gml:pos>42.5463 -73.2512</gml:pos> | <gml:pos>-34.407 150.883</gml:pos> | |||
| <gs:radius uom="urn:ogc:def:uom:EPSG::9001"> | </gml:Point> | |||
| 850.24 | <dyn:Dynamic> | |||
| </gs:radius> | <dyn:heading>278</dyn:heading> | |||
| </gs:Circle> | </dyn:Dynamic> | |||
| <gml:bearing> | </gp:location-info> | |||
| <gml:DirectionVector> | <gp:usage-rules/> | |||
| <gml:vector> 270.0 -60.0</gml:vector> | <method>gps</method> | |||
| </gml:DirectionVector> | ||||
| </gml:bearing> | ||||
| </gp:location-info> | ||||
| <gp:usage-rules/> | ||||
| <method>GPS</method> | ||||
| </gp:geopriv> | </gp:geopriv> | |||
| </device> | <timestamp>2012-04-5T10:18:29Z</timestamp> | |||
| </presence> | <dm:deviceID>vehicle-number</dm:deviceID> | |||
| </dm:device> | ||||
| </presence> | ||||
| --boundary1-- | ||||
| Figure 2: Example of Location Payload for In-Vehicular Emergency Call | Figure 2: SIP INVITE indicating an In-Vehicular Emergency Call | |||
| 6. Security Considerations | 6. Security Considerations | |||
| This document does not raise security considerations beyond those | This document does not raise security considerations beyond those | |||
| described in [10]. As with emergency service systems with end host | described in [10]. As with emergency service systems with end host | |||
| provided location information there is the possibility that that | provided location information there is the possibility that that | |||
| location is incorrect, either intentially (in case of an a denial of | location is incorrect, either intentially (in case of an a denial of | |||
| service attack against the emergency services infrastructure) or due | service attack against the emergency services infrastructure) or due | |||
| to a malfunctioning devices. The reader is referred to [11] for a | to a malfunctioning devices. The reader is referred to [11] for a | |||
| discussion of some of these vulnerabilities. | discussion of some of these vulnerabilities. | |||
| 7. IANA Considerations | 7. IANA Considerations | |||
| IANA is requested to register the URN 'urn:service:ecall' under the | IANA is requested to register the URN 'urn:service:ecall' under the | |||
| sub-services 'sos' registry defined in Section 4.2 of [8]. | sub-services 'sos' registry defined in Section 4.2 of [8]. | |||
| urn:service:ecall This service identifier reaches a public safety | This service identifier reaches a public safety answering point | |||
| answering point (PSAP), which in turn dispatches aid appropriate | (PSAP), which in turn dispatches aid appropriate to the emergency | |||
| to the emergency related to accidents of vehicles. | related to accidents of vehicles. Two sub-services are registered as | |||
| well, namely | ||||
| urn:service:ecall.manual This service URN indicates that an eCall | ||||
| had been triggered based on the manual interaction of the driver | ||||
| or a passenger. | ||||
| urn:service:ecall.automatic This service URN indicates that an eCall | ||||
| had been triggered automatically, for example, due to a crash. No | ||||
| human involvement was detected. | ||||
| 8. Contributors | 8. Contributors | |||
| We would like to thank Ulrich Dietz for his help with earlier | We would like to thank Ulrich Dietz for his help with earlier | |||
| versions of the document. | versions of the document. | |||
| 9. Acknowledgements | 9. Acknowledgements | |||
| We would like to thank Michael Montag, Arnoud van Wijk, and Gunnar | We would like to thank Michael Montag, Arnoud van Wijk, and Gunnar | |||
| Hellstroem for their feedback. | Hellstroem for their feedback. | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 50 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 50 ¶ | |||
| [9] Schulzrinne, H. and R. Marshall, "Requirements for Emergency | [9] Schulzrinne, H. and R. Marshall, "Requirements for Emergency | |||
| Context Resolution with Internet Technologies", RFC 5012, | Context Resolution with Internet Technologies", RFC 5012, | |||
| January 2008. | January 2008. | |||
| [10] Taylor, T., Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and M. Shanmugam, | [10] Taylor, T., Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and M. Shanmugam, | |||
| "Security Threats and Requirements for Emergency Call Marking | "Security Threats and Requirements for Emergency Call Marking | |||
| and Mapping", RFC 5069, January 2008. | and Mapping", RFC 5069, January 2008. | |||
| [11] Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and B. Aboba, "Trustworthy | [11] Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and B. Aboba, "Trustworthy | |||
| Location Information", draft-ietf-ecrit-trustworthy-location-02 | Location Information", draft-ietf-ecrit-trustworthy-location-03 | |||
| (work in progress), May 2011. | (work in progress), April 2012. | |||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Brian Rosen | Brian Rosen | |||
| NeuStar, Inc. | NeuStar, Inc. | |||
| 470 Conrad Dr | 470 Conrad Dr | |||
| Mars, PA 16046 | Mars, PA 16046 | |||
| US | US | |||
| Phone: | Phone: | |||
| End of changes. 18 change blocks. | ||||
| 53 lines changed or deleted | 94 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||