1. IETF ECRIT update Marc Linsner 5/11/10

2. ECRIT Charter (or a piece of it) ………The group will show how the availability of location data and call routing information at different steps in session setup would enable communication between a user and a relevant emergency response center. Though the term "call routing" is used in this document, it should be understood that some of the mechanisms which will be described might be used to enable other types of media streams. Video and text messaging, for example, might be used to request emergency services. …………..

3. Goals and Milestones DoneInformational RFC containing terminology definitions and the requirements – RFC 5012 DoneAn Informational document describing the threats and security considerations – RFC 5069 DoneA Standards Track RFC describing how to identify a session set-up request is to an emergency response center - RFC 5031 DoneA Standards Track RFC describing how to route an emergency call based on location information - RFC 5222, RFC 5223 DoneAn Informational document describing the Mapping Protocol Architecture – RFC 5582 DoneSubmit 'Location Hiding: Problem Statement and Requirements' to the IESG for consideration as an Informational RFC. – RFC Editor Queue DoneSubmit 'Framework for Emergency Calling using Internet Multimedia' to the IESG for consideration as an Informational RFC. – IESG Review DoneSubmit 'Best Current Practice for Communications Services in support of Emergency Calling' to the IESG for consideration as a BCP document – AD Evaluation DoneSpecifying Holes in LoST Service Boundary – IESG Evaluation Oct 2009Submit 'Synchronizing Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Protocol based Service Boundaries and Mapping Elements' to the IESG for consideration as an Experimental RFC - ID Exists Dec 2009Submit "LoST Extension for returning Boundary Information for Services" to the IESG for consideration as an Experimental RFC - ID Exists Mar 2010Submit "Using Imprecise Location for Emergency Call Routing" to the IESG for consideration as an Informational RF – ID Exists

4. Other Areas of Interest RPH http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace- 04http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ecrit-local-emergency-rph-namespace- 04 – The wg accepted this as a wg doc way back. PSAP Callback http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-psap-callbackhttp://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-psap-callback – Lots of interest. Unauthenticated emergency services http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-schulzrinne- ecrit-unauthenticated-access – Lots of concern that the problem is unbounded and we can't do anything other than document the challenges in this space. Transformations ID http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-polk-ecrit-lost- transformations-urn – Concerns that this belongs in GeoPriv. Concerns this is a solution looking for a problem. ECRIT Direct http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-winterbottom-ecrit-direct – Concerns this is attempting to 'write regulation'. Concerns of no support from PS community, NENA doesn't want it. Additional Data http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-rosen-ecrit-additional-data – NENA is asking IETF to assist by taking this international. Related to presence data.

5. Other Areas of Interest Data Only Emergency Calls http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-rosen- ecrit-data-only-ea – Concerns that intentions/requirements are not clear in the draft. Completing the Request Location http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-rosen- ecrit-completed-location-00.txt – Concerns that intentions/requirements are not clear in the draft. Service URN Update and Service Classification http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-forte-ecrit-service-classification http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-forte-ecrit-service-urn-policy http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-forte-ecrit-service-classification – An update to registering Service URNs. Concerns this is not a full solution, some satisfied with 80% solution. Emergency Text Messaging using SIP MESSAGE http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kim-ecrit-text-00.txt http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kim-ecrit-text-00.txt – Most issues are SIP protocol conversion. Describing Boundaries for Civic Addresses http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-thomson-ecrit-civic-boundary-00.txt – No list discussion

6. The WG Chairs and Ads … Will determine how to ‘classify’ the ‘Other Areas of Interest’ and either: – add milestones to the current charter – tweak the current charter (requires IESG approval) – we’ll tell the authors to submit their drafts to the Dispatch WG