Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government News

FCC to Push VoIP 911 Requirements 297

Posted by CmdrTaco from the this-can-only-work-badly dept.
maotx writes "Originaly declared a regulation free area, VoIP is going under a new look. With complaints against it, the FCC has decided to move forward with its original plan to require VoIP providers to provide 911 support. This brings up interesting questions on how they're going to know where in the world your VoIP enabled laptop is when you call 911."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

FCC to Push VoIP 911 Requirements More

FCC to Push VoIP 911 Requirements

Comments Filter:

  • Follow the ping packets! (Score:5, Funny)

    by physicsphairy ( 720718 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:24PM (#12376726)
    This brings up interesting questions on how they're going to know where in the world your VoIP enabled laptop is when you call 911.

    Traceroute? :p

    • Traceroute is all fine and dandy until your run smack-hard into a firewall......or three.

      "Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally redial 911. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the FCC."

    • Re:Follow the ping packets! (Score:4, Funny)

      by tont0r ( 868535 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:29PM (#12376778)
      besides, if someone is an emergancy, who is gonna bother booting up their laptop to make a 911 call? "oh man! you are in so much trouble.. once my laptop boots up."

      • Re:Follow the ping packets! (Score:5, Informative)

        by Nos. ( 179609 ) <andrewNO@SPAMthekerrs.ca> on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:56PM (#12377007) Homepage
        The CRTC in Canada made 911 mandatory just recently. I wrote [jointheweb.org] about this earlier. They basically say that for a roaming type service (I don't know of any VoIP that isn't), the provider does not have to connect you to the correct call center automatically. Instead, the caller should be able to identify his/her location and then the call can be transfered to the correct center. Not idea, but there is not a reliable way to no location based on IP, or even something like GPS. The other big thing that the CRTC said was that the service provider had to inform the customer clearly of these limits to 911 before the customer signed up. The CRTC news release is here [crtc.gc.ca]

    • Won't work. (Score:4, Informative)

      by jd ( 1658 ) <imipak@ y a hoo.com> on Thursday April 28, 2005 @06:24PM (#12377276) Homepage Journal
      Any kind of VPN tunneling will make using traceroutes or pings useless for tracking purposes.


      IPv6 would allow you to deduce the geographical location, as the IP address is a function of the logical location, which can then be used to infer the most probable geographical location. However, IPv4 has nothing that allows you to infer location by address. This may actually be the driving force for IPv6, given that none of the other reasons (privacy, addressability, etc) have ever worked with people.

    • Providing 911 location is a very hard thing to do with VoIP. By pushing hard on this, it could almost become a fatal flaw in VoIP. It makes you wonder whether this is just a ploy by existing cariers to stomp VoIP.
    • Yeah, or maybe they'll do what they did in the old days (which wasn't that long ago) -- you had to tell them where you were.

      Granted, calling 911 and having your location show up on a map for the dispatcher is nice, but it isn't necessary.

      We already have a great protocol for sending all kinds of information over VoIP lines, including the identity and location of the caller and what their problem is. It's called English.

  • GPS (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Leroy Brown ( 71070 ) * on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:25PM (#12376737) Homepage
    With the universal adoption of GPS, it wouldn't be hard to put a GPS receiver on a USB key-fob and relay the information in some standardized fashion.

    It's being bundled into cell phones these days for the same purpose.

    Just don't bundle it into the computer itself, or the conspiracy theorists may become the conspiracy realists. ;)

    • Re:GPS (Score:2, Interesting)

      by civman2 ( 773494 )
      It would be very expensive, even if easy. Would you really pay $100 for a USB-GPS so that you can use (free) VOIP on your laptop? And what if you are using Skype via WiFi on your Windows Mobile device?

      And what if I sign up for my VOIP with a canadian company, but primarily use it in the US. Do I need GPS then? Seems to be a blow to US companies if you require it.
      • Most people want local numbers, so even if the company is Canadian, they will still have to get the numbers delievered to their network.

        I think the GPS idea won't work, simply because you can't get a reliable signal indoors.

        a GPS keyfob could be made for a lot less than $100 in bulk.

        I think the 911 requirement is going to be aimed at the VoIP carriers selling ATA units, to replace your primary phone. This would allow them to modify the ATA unit. Now it is possible (likely) the regulation could end up b

      • Re:GPS (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Leroy Brown ( 71070 ) *
        If the FCC requires them to do something, then they'll have to either conform or fight the FCC.

        If major cell phone manufacturers are doing this already, it doesn't seem like much of an obstacle in the long term for commercial VoIP vendors to issue one with their service, especially if it helps them avoid being sued by its users or penalized by the FCC.
      • Seems to be a blow to US companies if you require it.

        "We Don't know what you're talking about. Stop Spreading FUD."

        -Sens. Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe, c/o Sprint, Verizon, and Bellsouth
    • It's being bundled into cell phones these days for the same purpose.

      GPS in cell phones is not used to trace 911 calls. It is used as an accurate timing synchronization device.

      • Re:GPS (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Leroy Brown ( 71070 ) *
        Not true. Text from my Sanyo telephone:
        "Turning location on will allow the network to detect your position, making some Sprint applications easier to use. Turning location off will hide your location from everyone except 911. Ever if location is turned on in this handset, no service may use your location without your express permission."

        and an interesting tidbit I found on google (url http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/EOP/OSTP/html/0053_4.h tml [nara.gov])
        " Enhanced-911: The FCC will soon require that all new cellula

    • Re:GPS (Score:5, Insightful)

      by drmerope ( 771119 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:49PM (#12376949)
      So what exactly are you proposing? That the FCC require VoIP providers support transmission of location information? That the FCC require VoIP providers to properly route you to the local 911 center? That the FCC require the VoIP providers mandate that all VoIP services be location enabled?

      What about people who don't want to stick a GPS dongle into their computer? What about people who *forget* to stick in the dongle when they rush to call 911? What about the people who claim to have done those things but haven't actually, and then turn around and sue?

      Here's the trouble: It isn't that 911 operator needs to know where you are; you can give that information just fine. The trouble is that your call has to go to a local 911 dispatch center, not a dispatch center 3000 miles away.

      If you've ever dealt with 911, then you know that they could never handle rerouting calls. Often it seems that they are barely able to properly dispatch local officers and emergency medical services.

      Why do we have 911? People were observed to be stupid. The local police used to just have an emergency number. Doh, people can't remember the number. what to do, what to do... make one number for everyone, everywhere. make a big marketing campaign. yeah.

      This whole problem would go away if you just had to give at least an area code as a prefix to dialing 911. Then the call could be routed to a local-state dispatcher. *Now that sounds feasible*.

      As for your being beaten to death and you just barely manage to dial 911 and the police only hear the crime and trace the call... well that's sort of a fringe benefit of getting a land-land. Perhaps you should consider that before opting for other solutions.

      Do we really all need to be burdened? Can some people just be free to offer bare-bones service?

      Do you really want GPS tracking of your location--mandated by the government?
      • One of the greatest advantages of "911" is that my two year old daughter, can call it without trouble. We hear stories like that occasionally.

        Now imagine the effectiveness of 911 when you have to also teach the concept of area codes.

      • Re:GPS (Score:5, Insightful)

        by westlake ( 615356 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @06:25PM (#12377285)
        Why do we have 911? People were observed to be stupid.

        Not stupid, just desperately sick and afraid. There is no way to understand the experience until you have been through it yourself, or with your parents, or with your kids.

        • Trama is one thing. But preparedness is another. Knowing what the numbers are ahead of time. Programming them into your speed dial. Etc.

          Anyways stupid is a broader word than you give it credit: "4. Dazed, stunned, or stupefied." (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=stupid [reference.com])

          And don't commit a generalization fallacy. I agree there are times when the simplist solution is ideal and nice, but that isn't a conclusive arguement for imposing a requirement that a particular implementation must be avai
      • That'll work great on vacation where I just may not know the local area code.........

        This whole problem would go away if you just had to give at least an area code as a prefix to dialing 911. Then the call could be routed to a local-state dispatcher. *Now that sounds feasible*.

      • Re:GPS (Score:3, Informative)

        by DerekLyons ( 302214 )

        If you've ever dealt with 911, then you know that they could never handle rerouting calls. Often it seems that they are barely able to properly dispatch local officers and emergency medical services.

        I've used 911 probably around 5 times over the last decade. I can firmly state, that at least for my community, you are utterly wrong.

        Why do we have 911? People were observed to be stupid. The local police used to just have an emergency number. Doh, people can't remember the number. what to do, what to do

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @06:04PM (#12377078)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:GPS (Score:2)

      by nizo ( 81281 ) *
      It would probably be cheaper for companys to include a disposable pre-paid cellphone for 911 calls. But once GPS units are cheaper that might solve the price issue at least.
    • The difference is that cellphones already have RF processing elements etc and adding GPS is not a big deal. Adding GPS to all VoIp phones is going to cost...

  • Yeah (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:25PM (#12376740)
    Well, what about when you use your VoIP through a VPN that is piggy backing off the business next door's wireless?

    • Re:Yeah (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Low2000 ( 606536 )
      Then your still most likely reaching the correct local emergency servies since the business isn't terribly far.

  • -- busy signal -- (Score:4, Insightful)

    by http101 ( 522275 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:26PM (#12376747) Homepage
    Now I have to wonder, where in the world are the 911 prank callers? Since we have a 911-enabled VOIP network with no trace feature, how are we to stop all the pranksters who like to call 911 with fake calls? AND, lets not forget the legitimate calls being ignored or suffering from the DDoS they're encountering. Are the people who are really being raped, murdered or worse, going to get through to the 911 ops?
    • "Are the people who are really being raped, murdered or worse,"

      Worse? You mean like having their intellectual property rights violated? Wha? Oh. never mind. You must have been reading some RIAA press releases.

    • aren't you given a phone number with VoIP? I would think you could just find out who that number is registered to. Then again, VoIP companies aren't regulated the same, so I don't know what hoops 911 would have to jump through to get this info. Another downside of unregulated VoIP. Regulating VoIP is a double-edged sword. Regulating it will stifle its adoption by removing many of the monetary benefits. Leaving it unregulated will cause some problems, such as 911, but it's easier to leave it less regul
    • Now I have to wonder, where in the world are the 911 prank callers? Since we have a 911-enabled VOIP network with no trace feature, how are we to stop all the pranksters who like to call 911 with fake calls? AND, lets not forget the legitimate calls being ignored or suffering from the DDoS they're encountering. Are the people who are really being raped, murdered or worse, going to get through to the 911 ops?

      Most cell-phone providers accept 911 calls even from phones that have been 'shut off'.

      It's ea

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:27PM (#12376752)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Yes, because your bills are sent to where you are with your laptop *at that moment* (highway, hotel, coffee shop), not the billing address you specified with you signed up for the service.
      • Yes, because your bills are sent to where you are with your laptop *at that moment* (highway, hotel, coffee shop), not the billing address you specified with you signed up for the service.

        When you call 911 the "regular way", you don't get your local coffee shop's 911 service, you get the 911 for your municipality/region. That's most likely the same region as your billing address, unless you travel out of town a lot, as the parent said.
        • Depends on where you live. My town has about 15,000 people in it. More often than not, if I'm not at home, I'm in a different town, and that means a different 911 dispatch area.
        • When you call 911 the "regular way", you don't get your local coffee shop's 911 service

          You are pedantically correct but completely wrong within the framework of this discussion.

          When you call 911 from the local coffee shop, the 911 operator knows you are at the local coffee shop. She may even know where in the building the extension you're on is located. The point is not what 911 call center answers your phone; the point is that the operator sees on screen the exact location of the phone you're calling fr
    • Do you simply have no idea what VoIP is and how it works?

      VoIP has two benefits or advantages. One advantage is taht it offers dirt cheap longdistance phone service by carrying the calls over the internet.

      The other major advantage is that VoIP is completely portable. It is not tied to any specific location. If you can get internet access, you can use VoIP.

      So, if you are driving down the highway, passing a truckstop with a wi-fi hotspot, and you decide to use your laptop or palm top computer to place a VoI
      • By using Mobile IP, your IP address will vary acording to your location, even if you are in transit at the time. As you move between towers or other receivers, your IP address will change and streams to the old addresses will be forwarded.

        As such, all the VoIP software needs to do is report the current IP address, and things will be fine.

        Well, except that this won't work with IPv4, as most such systems use NAT to get round the lack of addresses. IPv6, on the other hand, uses IP addresses derived from t

    • Nah... why use billing address when you can require all laptop manufacturers to provide a GPS reciever and add your location to all packet data? Wouldn't that be great!

  • Revenge of the Bells (Score:3, Informative)

    by prurientknave ( 820507 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:29PM (#12376777)
    This looks like a decision passed to kowtow to the region bells who think they're unfairly harassed by providing 911 services.

    With wifi, ssh tunnels and unspecified internal deployment of handsets in a corporation it's ridiculous to expect vonage et al to provide 911 services comparable to the regional bell.

    I fully expect 911 calls to end up getting into a frenzy for an incident that is eventually located in bombay.

  • No location requirment (Score:5, Interesting)

    by plilja ( 91030 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:30PM (#12376787)
    If they follow the original proposal, there will not be a location requirement for 911, just a requirement for 911 connectivity. That is, if you dial 911 on a VoIP phone you will get a 911 operator...but you will still need to tell that operator your location. Some VoIP vendors may impliment a primary residence that gets displayed to 911 operators, but this would be optional. Currently if you dial 911 on a VoIP phone, you will only get a 911 operator if your VoIP vendor has implimented the feature voluntarily.

  • Vonage has 911 service (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:31PM (#12376793)
    I just got Vonage, and it has pseudo 911. You activate it by entering your address.

    It's not real 911 because it connects to an intermediary service that then connects you to the real 911.

    http://www.vonage.com/help_knowledgeBase_article.p hp?article=394 [vonage.com]

  • Install Option (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Stanistani ( 808333 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:32PM (#12376803) Homepage Journal
    Example:

    "To enable 911 service, click YES.

    Please enter your location below"

    Just don't make the default "Off."
    • "Please enter your location below."

      "Well, I live in Jonestown on 1st and Main...
      ...but I take my laptop to work, so from 9-5 M-F I'm at 43rd and H...
      ...But that means I'm in traffic from 8-9 and 5-6...
      ...Oh, and I'll be ~100 miles north in Williamsburg every other weekend to visit family...
      ...And I have this vacation to Hawaii coming up next month..."

      And so on. No one is going to update their location every time they move, so you'd have to specify the location when making the call...which is hard

  • User Problems (Score:2, Informative)

    by ericschoon ( 814346 )
    Since the inception of VoIP, I have not had a problem with subscribers not being able to access the 911 emergency system. They are still able to call directly to their police or fire department. I was surprised to find, however, that the typical VoIP user doesn't understand that the phone (which looks like any other phone) is fundamentally different in the way it handles information and can't reach 911. This can lead (in my mind at least) to a lot of confused subscribers at a time of crisis
    Regardless,

    • Dumb design (Score:3, Insightful)

      by EmbeddedJanitor ( 597831 )
      " was surprised to find, however, that the typical VoIP user doesn't understand that the phone .. is fundamentally different "

      If you make it look the same then how will they know the difference? If a neighbour picks up the phone to dial how will they know?

      People using technology should not have to be burdened with how it works, and most people don't know how their stuff works (do you know how lag and advance work in your car's ignition?). Most people see their PC + Google + internet + the rest of the web

  • Ask... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by HermanAB ( 661181 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:33PM (#12376819)
    Ask and your request will be answered. People who call 911, usually can speak and usually can tell where they are. That should take care of 99.9% of the problem.

    • Re:Ask... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Fish Heads ( 642181 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:47PM (#12376927)
      They can't always speak, or don't always know where they are. When I was in EMT training we got to hear quite a few 911 calls and go through the case. More than once the person started to call for help (generally due to herat attack or the like) and couldn't get as far as their name before they collapsed with the phone off the hook. Fortunately, 911 had the guys address right on the screen and had already rolled service and advised they may have to use forced entry. And if a little kid calls they may not know or be able to relay their current physical location. Or they may know but due to the trauma of mommy laying on the floor unconscious not be able to relay that info to the nice dispatcher on the other side.
    • That's assuming that they are not sick or injured, or freaking out about someone else that is sick or injured. It also assumes that the caller is familiar with their location.

      It can be very helpful if there is an address listing on, or near, the telephone. They do something similar here with fire alarms. There is a placard that says to call 911 and lists the address.

    • Vonage doesn't offer local area codes here. So, how can they offer 911 service? What happens when someone carries their laptop to another location? The problem isn't just giving the location, but making sure that the call makes it to the proper call center the first time.
    • Telling your street address in Los Angeles to the 911 dispatcher in Boston doesn't really do you that much good... VOIP needs to have some idea of where you are BEFORE it can determine the correct 911 operator to connect you to, doesn't it?

  • Require to register... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by neowolf ( 173735 )
    I would think an easy solution would be to REQUIRE that a person signing up for VOIP service provide their address for 911 service before even turning on their access to the network. This was prompted because of problems with people who were too ignorant or lazy to submit this information even when prompted several times to by the provider. (Specifically- Vonage.) If the information was required prior to service activation- it wouldn't be a problem.

    It will still be an issue for people who travel with their

  • And there we have it... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by FreeLinux ( 555387 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:34PM (#12376831)
    And there we have it, VoIP vaporizes with a small puff of white smoke. The fact of the matter is that it is not possible to provide a reliable 911 service with the present VoIP implementations.

    Wire line services can provide 911 location service because the phones are physically wired to a specific location. A number cannot move without the phone company knowing exactly where it has moved to. This is not possible with the present incarnation of VoIP. In fact, the only way that reliable 911 location service will ever be possible is if every VoIP device has a GPS receiver in it and transmits the location information when the VoIP terminal registers with the PBX. Any other way WILL fail.

    This will require an all new VoIP implementation/protocol, as well as new VoIP equipment to make it work. Now, I just have to figure out how to make an ATA with GPS receiver embedded in it receive the GPS signal while under a desk indoors.

    If VoIP is regulated, the baby Bells will won it. Do you feel pown3d?
    • Wire line services can provide 911 location service because the phones are physically wired to a specific location.

      Not entirely true. Ever wonder why the operator asks you to confirm your address when you call 911 (at least, they have the three times I've had to call)? Because they have phone company data, but that data isn't always up-to-the-minute.

      One solution, which many other posters have offered, is to require VOIP providers to maintain the same location data on customers that normal telcos do now
    • centralized VOIP companies may have some problems, but people who just make client software wouldn't require this. so Skype would be fine.

      Just have a file with your information sent to to the VOIP 911 system. If it's out of date, sucks to be you.

      no, I don't feel pown3d. I eel like some people are trying to get some sort of emergence services set up for an emerging technology. It's called forward thinking. I actually try to stay involved in politics, so I can write letters and discuss this sort of thing wi

  • Dangerous curves ahead.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by zappepcs ( 820751 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:36PM (#12376844) Journal
    Yes, and if the govt. et al require 911 service of VOIP providers, then get ready for static IP's and IP V6 requirements, and all sorts of nonsensical BS about the Internet and regulations.

    Trust me, once they get even one regulation passed regarding the use or configuration of the Internet, it WILL snowball...

  • Easy... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:36PM (#12376845) Homepage
    There are a few ways to do this;

    1) Use the callerid # to lookup the address in a database which is *required* to be accurate. By law. This would be a step big companies take care of for you, transparently, while the smaller of us who buy our numbers from places like voicepulse would fill out a form when we purchase a number

    2) e911. Make it universal.

    I like option 1 myself, but I could see logistical problems, not to mention abuse problems, were it not handled correctly.

  • VoIP e911 works for me (Score:5, Interesting)

    by chrispix ( 624431 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:36PM (#12376850)
    I have Verizon Fios internet service, along with Sunrocket VoIP service. I was quite interested in finding out if 911 even connected me to the right place, as several people said it did not work w/ VoIP providers. So I called the non-emergency number in Rowlett, Tx. They answered my call, and I let them know I was going to test my 911 service as I had a new phone provider. I hung up, dialed 911. It took maybe 3-4 seconds to get a ring tone, and the emergency operator in Rowlett, picked up the phone, and asked what my emergency was. I told her that I just called the non-emergency number, and was testing 911. She then informed me my name, and my address came thru with the call. So looks like I don't have anything to worry about. :) Also make sure if you are testing your 911, you call the non-emergency number first, although you never know where you might wind up.
    • But the small time provider doesn't have access to that database to provide the E911 services, all they will be able to see is the phone number, no address or name or anything. That's been the biggest complaint, but I say hey, they asked your address 10 years ago, why not now?

    • Re:VoIP e911 works for me (Score:5, Informative)

      by adolf ( 21054 ) * <flodadolf@gmail.com> on Friday April 29, 2005 @12:14AM (#12380022) Journal
      I've spent the past few days working in the dispatch center of an small county sheriff's office, installing some new gear.

      Today, someone brought in chili, which was excellent. Someone else ordered a sack of hamburgers from the joint down the road (which were delivered, and were extraordinarily tasty). People were generally enjoying their servitude in that small, locked-down room.

      On top of the dispatch console was some eccentric 911 industry trade rag. The cover story was about VOIP, and how it currently relates to 911 service as we know it.

      Therefore, they're aware of it, and the possible problems it might have.

      The 911 phone nearly never rings. And, at least today, it only rang once for an emergency. The rest of the calls (a half dozen, or so) were all from MCI, who were running tests on a new-ish overlay area code.

      Every now and then, the radio would make some noise that the dispatcher would respond to.

      The dispatchers spent the rest of their day waiting for the phone to ring and shooting the shit with eachother.

      So, just to reassure anyone who's wary:

      Go ahead and test your 911 service. Just make sure that you've informed them beforehand, and don't waste their time with superflous verbiage.

      And if, for some reason, it doesn't work: Call them back, and explain that the test failed. If you think you can fix the problem, tell them that you might like to attempt another test later. Thank them, and hang up.

      Believe me: Those are real people on the other end of the line. They're happy to invest a few minutes of their time, if that means a slim possibly saving someone's life.

      They want this stuff to work correctly at least as much as you do.

  • blurring the lines between phone and just voice (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MattW ( 97290 ) <matt@ender.com> on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:37PM (#12376856) Homepage
    As I see it, one of the problems with this is simply determining where "phone" services begin and end. For example, while Vonage or Lingo may be a real 'phone replacement' and for 99.9% of users should be able to do 911 service, how about Skype? If you only use Skypeout and you only use it via a headset on a laptop, is that VoIP? It certainly *is* "Voice over IP", but does that make it a phone service that should need 911 service?

    If they start classifying things like Skype as a voice telecommunications service and requiring 911 calls to function, then what's next? 911 requirements for Teamspeak?

    Maybe a VoIP "phone" is one which can place a call which eventually gets circuit switched on one end, even if 99% of the transit is packet switched.

    It seems to me that what really needs to happen is a revamping of the 911 system to deal with the portability of numbers. You want 911? Fine, go somewhere and configure your address any time you move the phone around. When you dial 911, it transmits your entered address. Possibly the hardware/software acting as your phone also monitors the MAC address of its default gateway after you change the address associated; if the MAC address changes but the address has not, a warning goes out to emergency services that notes that there is reason to believe the address may not be completely reliable (and thus, hopefully an emergency operator can confirm it with you when you call).

    Lots of little things rely on the phone network. My house alarm, for example, will freak out completely if I cut my phone service entirely, because it uses the phone line to keep in touch with the alarm monitoring service.
    • If they start classifying things like Skype as a voice telecommunications service and requiring 911 calls to function, then what's next? 911 requirements for Teamspeak?

      Here's the clearest line. If calling 911 makes sense (you can dial numbers as if it were a regular telephone), then calling 911 should work.

      I'm pretty sure Teamspeak doesn't connect you to the public telephone network, so 911 is not a requirement. SkypeOut does. You can call most local, long-distance, and international numbers, so 911 serv
      • >>Here's the clearest line. If calling 911 makes sense (you can dial numbers as if it were a regular telephone), then calling 911 should work.

        You're missing the point: If the adapter is portable then how does the 911 system know where it is, and therefore where to send the cops, ambulance, etc.?

        The answer is that it's impossible. You'd have to expect the user to update the location information and we all know you can't count on users.
    • what's next? 911 requirements for Teamspeak?

      Call 911! Call 911! I'm being gangked!

  • A way to handle this. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dmaxwell ( 43234 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @05:41PM (#12376889)
    One way this could be done is if all of the 911 services also have a full (area)-xxx-xxxx phone number. You would then alias that to "911" in your VOIP hardware.
    • Yes, that would make sense. But the incumbent telcos intentionally keep those numbers secret. The numbers exist, of course, and with enough digging and googling you can find a VERY small handful of them. But the old telcos keep these to themselves, so that they can keep beating up on the VoIP users who are depriving the telcos of their rightful money.
  • I think the market was already demanding the 911 access and that it was going to work itself out anyways, but now big brother has stepped in and we can be assured it will be more expensive, and take 5 years to implement.

    On the other hand, even if it is reflected in higher rates I am not going to compain about the results. I was contemplating getting the cheapest possible land line (limited calls, etc) for my PBX to allow 911. Any increase in rates will most likely be less than the $10-15 I was going to h

  • So what? (Score:2)

    by rew ( 6140 )
    If the first requirement is that 911 (or 112 in europe) works, then you can regulate that a best-effort location guess should be attempted. Most people will be able to tell the operator where they are. Some might not. Is that "some might not" reason for not requiring 911 service at all?
  • The comparisons with cellphones (and there lack of 911 location information) needs to take a few point into consideration:
    1. Calls from cellphones to 911 typically go the State Police dispatcher who will then have to contact the local dispatcher to actually send someone (other then the state police) to the caller. This takes extra time and puts one more person in the game of 'telephone' that is played from 911 requester to 911 provider.
    2. Adding VOIP to the State police dispatcher will make them even more
    • I have called 911 several times from cell phones (funny, always about auto accidents). I have always been connected to a local dispatcher, although frequently the wrong one (I got the City of Austin, when I was outside the city limits.) Our local governments have formed a central call center to fix that as well.

      I haven't cared much about 911, I have a cell phone, my wife has a cell phone, etc. But we have a 4 month old son. I am sure he will be old enough to call 911 before he will be old enough to giv

  • Simple solution (Score:2, Insightful)

    by nizo ( 81281 ) *
    They can just include a little card for subscribers to carry around in their wallet that says, "In case of emergency, shout 'Someone call 911' until help arrives".

  • An interesting dilemma for roaming VoIP (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hellfire ( 86129 ) <deviladv.gmail@com> on Thursday April 28, 2005 @06:05PM (#12377092) Homepage
    The fact is, VoIP is going to blow the phone paradigm away in about 30 years. Right now, home networks are getting VoIP boxes and software, and users are providing addresses for these home networks because those boxes are stationary. But what about people who are smart enough to take their VoIP box with them? What about the posibility of VoIP over wireless in 30 years?

    The copper wire switched networks have specific addresses they can link to nodes because the network was proprietary and controlled. Now that the network (the internet) is open, it doesn't yet have this feature that can tie an IP address, particularly a roaming IP address, to a location.

    The only thing I can think of right now are GPS locators on all phones which have a frequency only the 911 operators can access... but that could be abused way too easily.

    For now, asking the VoIPs to provide 911 service like vonage does is enough for the time being, but soon they'll have to solve this problem for VoIP roamers, and that will require a "think-outside-the-box" solution. As VoIP evolves, 911 will have to be completely redesigned.
  • If I recall correctly, in the old times there wasn't a way to find out where a call came from.

  • 911 on VoIP CAN work (Score:3, Informative)

    by lseltzer ( 311306 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @06:18PM (#12377238)
    Just so everyone knows, 911 can work on VoIP. My provider, Speakeasy, requires in their terms of service that the adapter be used at the location to which it is sent, the address on the agreement, so that 911 services can work. One of the first things I did was to test it - I called the cops first and they said it was OK; I called 911 and the same guy answered and read back my name and address from the screen.
  • So how about people that aren't in planet USA? In Britain, its 999 (and many people don't know 911). In Australia, its 000. In Europe, its 112 (and many people can't speak 911). Shouldn't this bill provide for all of these "international" emergency services numbers?

  • Stupid misunderstanding of the new world (Score:4, Interesting)

    by btempleton ( 149110 ) on Thursday April 28, 2005 @06:38PM (#12377391) Homepage
    As I understand it, they want to put both E911 and universal access surcharges on VoIP phones. The big telcos want this because they have to pay them and they are a barrier to entry for small companies.

    But what do you regulate? SIP phones? There is a SIP phone in every copy of Windows XP, and freely available ones for all OSs. They can all register with proxies and make VoIP calls. They have to pay to go out to the PSTN right now, though.

    Instead, they are putting the regs if the service gives you a phone number for incoming calls. Ie. it's backwards. If you can _receive_ calls (without necessarily the ability to make them) from the PSTN, then you have to be able to make an outgoing call to 911.

    But anything can be a phone now. It can look like an old phone or it can be a piece of software. Anything can be set up to receive calls, or make them, or both. Or not talk to the PSTN at all. Or talk to it in limited ways (for example there are dial-in numbers that let you call from the PSTN and then enter a Free World Dialup number, making every FWD phone able to receive a call from the PSTN.)

    This is a dangerous rathole. Accept that voice != emergency service path and find a better way.

Slashdot Top Deals

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Close