idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits40903/draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall-21.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (December 15, 2016) is 1982 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) == Outdated reference: draft-ietf-ecrit-car-crash has been published as RFC 8148 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 ECRIT R. Gellens 3 Internet-Draft Core Technology Consulting 4 Intended status: Standards Track H. Tschofenig 5 Expires: June 18, 2017 Individual 6 December 15, 2016 8 Next-Generation Pan-European eCall 9 draft-ietf-ecrit-ecall-21.txt 11 Abstract 13 This document describes how to use IP-based emergency services 14 mechanisms to support the next generation of the pan European in- 15 vehicle emergency call service defined under the eSafety initiative 16 of the European Commission (generally referred to as "eCall"). eCall 17 is a standardized and mandated system for a special form of emergency 18 calls placed by vehicles, providing real-time communications and an 19 integrated set of related data. 21 This document also registers MIME media types and an Emergency Call 22 Additional Data Block for the eCall vehicle data and metadata/control 23 data, and an INFO package to enable carrying this data in SIP INFO 24 requests. 26 Although this specification is designed to meet the requirements of 27 European next-generation eCall, it is specified generically such that 28 the technology can be re-used or extended to suit requirements across 29 jurisdictions. 31 Status of This Memo 33 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 34 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 36 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 37 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 38 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 39 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 41 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 42 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 43 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 44 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 46 This Internet-Draft will expire on June 18, 2017. 48 Copyright Notice 50 Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 51 document authors. All rights reserved. 53 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 54 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 55 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 56 publication of this document. Please review these documents 57 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 58 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 59 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 60 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 61 described in the Simplified BSD License. 63 Table of Contents 65 1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 66 2. Document Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 67 3. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 68 4. eCall Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 69 5. Vehicle Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 70 6. Data Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 71 7. Call Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 72 8. Test Calls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 73 9. The Metadata/Control Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 74 9.1. The Control Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 75 9.1.1. The element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 76 9.1.1.1. Attributes of the element . . . . . . . . . 14 77 9.1.1.2. Child Element of the element . . . . . . . 14 78 9.1.1.3. Ack Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 79 9.1.2. The element . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 80 9.1.2.1. Child Elements of the element . . 15 81 9.1.2.2. Capabilities Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 82 9.1.3. The element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 83 9.1.3.1. Attributes of the element . . . . . . . 16 84 9.1.3.2. Request Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 85 10. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 86 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 87 12. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 88 13. XML Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 89 14. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 90 14.1. The EmergencyCallData Media Subtree . . . . . . . . . . 28 91 14.2. Service URN Registrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 92 14.3. MIME Media Type Registration for 93 'application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per' . . . . . 29 94 14.4. MIME Media Type Registration for 95 'application/emergencyCallData.control+xml' . . . . . . 31 97 14.5. Registration of the 'eCall.MSD' entry in the Emergency 98 Call Additional Data Types registry . . . . . . . . . . 32 99 14.6. Registration of the 'control' entry in the Emergency 100 Call Additional Data Types registry . . . . . . . . . . 32 101 14.7. Registration of the emergencyCallData.eCall Info Package 33 102 14.8. URN Sub-Namespace Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 103 14.8.1. Registration for urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eCall . . . 33 104 14.8.2. Registration for urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:control . . 33 105 14.9. Registry Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 106 14.9.1. Emergency Call Action Registry . . . . . . . . . . . 34 107 14.9.2. Emergency Call Action Failure Reason Registry . . . 35 108 14.10. The emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO package . . . . . . 36 109 14.10.1. Overall Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 110 14.10.2. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 111 14.10.3. Info Package Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 112 14.10.4. Info Package Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 113 14.10.5. SIP Option-Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 114 14.10.6. INFO Request Body Parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 115 14.10.7. Info Package Usage Restrictions . . . . . . . . . . 38 116 14.10.8. Rate of INFO Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 117 14.10.9. Info Package Security Considerations . . . . . . . 39 118 14.10.10. Implementation Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 119 14.10.11. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 120 15. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 121 16. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 122 17. Changes from Previous Versions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 123 17.1. Changes from draft-ietf-19 to draft-ietf-20 . . . . . . 39 124 17.2. Changes from draft-ietf-18 to draft-ietf-19 . . . . . . 39 125 17.3. Changes from draft-ietf-17 to draft-ietf-18 . . . . . . 40 126 17.4. Changes from draft-ietf-16 to draft-ietf-17 . . . . . . 40 127 17.5. Changes from draft-ietf-15 to draft-ietf-16 . . . . . . 40 128 17.6. Changes from draft-ietf-14 to draft-ietf-15 . . . . . . 40 129 17.7. Changes from draft-ietf-13 to draft-ietf-14 . . . . . . 40 130 17.8. Changes from draft-ietf-12 to draft-ietf-13 . . . . . . 40 131 17.9. Changes from draft-ietf-11 to draft-ietf-12 . . . . . . 40 132 17.10. Changes from draft-ietf-09 to draft-ietf-11 . . . . . . 41 133 17.11. Changes from draft-ietf-08 to draft-ietf-09 . . . . . . 41 134 17.12. Changes from draft-ietf-07 to draft-ietf-08 . . . . . . 41 135 17.13. Changes from draft-ietf-06 to draft-ietf-07 . . . . . . 42 136 17.14. Changes from draft-ietf-05 to draft-ietf-06 . . . . . . 42 137 17.15. Changes from draft-ietf-04 to draft-ietf-05 . . . . . . 42 138 17.16. Changes from draft-ietf-03 to draft-ietf-04 . . . . . . 42 139 17.17. Changes from draft-ietf-02 to draft-ietf-03 . . . . . . 42 140 17.18. Changes from draft-ietf-01 to draft-ietf-02 . . . . . . 42 141 17.19. Changes from draft-ietf-00 to draft-ietf-01 . . . . . . 43 142 17.20. Changes from draft-gellens-03 to draft-ietf-00 . . . . . 43 143 17.21. Changes from draft-gellens-02 to -03 . . . . . . . . . . 43 144 17.22. Changes from draft-gellens-01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . 43 145 17.23. Changes from draft-gellens-00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . 44 146 18. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 147 18.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 148 18.2. Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 149 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 151 1. Terminology 153 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 154 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 155 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 157 This document re-uses terminology defined in Section 3 of [RFC5012]. 159 Additionally, we use the following abbreviations: 161 +--------+----------------------------------------+ 162 | Term | Expansion | 163 +--------+----------------------------------------+ 164 | 3GPP | 3rd Generation Partnership Project | 165 | | | 166 | CEN | European Committee for Standardization | 167 | | | 168 | EENA | European Emergency Number Association | 169 | | | 170 | ESInet | Emergency Services IP network | 171 | | | 172 | IMS | IP Multimedia Subsystem | 173 | | | 174 | IVS | In-Vehicle System | 175 | | | 176 | MNO | Mobile Network Operator | 177 | | | 178 | MSD | Minimum Set of Data | 179 | | | 180 | PSAP | Public Safety Answering Point | 181 +--------+----------------------------------------+ 183 2. Document Scope 185 This document is focused on the signaling, data exchange, and 186 protocol needs of next-generation eCall (NG-eCall, also referred to 187 as packet-switched eCall or all-IP eCall) within the SIP framework 188 for emergency calls (as described in [RFC6443] and [RFC6881]). eCall 189 itself is specified by 3GPP (3rd Generation Partnership Project) and 190 CEN (European Committee for Standardization) and these specifications 191 include far greater scope than is covered here. 193 The eCall service operates over cellular wireless communication, but 194 this document does not address cellular-specific details, nor client 195 domain selection (e.g., circuit-switched versus packet-switched). 196 All such aspects are the purview of their respective standards 197 bodies. The scope of this document is limited to eCall operating 198 within a SIP-based environment (e.g., 3GPP IMS Emergency Calling 199 [TS23.167]). 201 Although this specification is designed to meet the requirements of 202 pan-European next-generation eCall, it is specified generically such 203 that the technology can be re-used or extended to suit requirements 204 across jurisdictions (see, e.g., [I-D.ietf-ecrit-car-crash]), and 205 extension points are provided to facilitate this. 207 Note that vehicles designed for multiple regions might need to 208 support eCall and other Advanced Automatic Crash Notification (AACN) 209 systems (such as described in [I-D.ietf-ecrit-car-crash]), but this 210 is out of scope of this document. 212 3. Introduction 214 Emergency calls made from vehicles (e.g., in the event of a crash) 215 assist in significantly reducing road deaths and injuries by allowing 216 emergency services to be aware of the incident, the state of the 217 vehicle, the location of the vehicle, and to have a voice channel 218 with the vehicle occupants. This enables a quick and appropriate 219 response. 221 The European Commission initiative of eCall was conceived in the late 222 1990s, and has evolved to a European Parliament decision requiring 223 the implementation of a compliant in-vehicle system (IVS) in new 224 vehicles and the deployment of eCall in the European Member States in 225 the very near future. Other regions are developing eCall-compatible 226 systems. 228 The pan-European eCall system provides a standardized and mandated 229 mechanism for emergency calls by vehicles. eCall establishes 230 procedures for such calls to be placed by in-vehicle systems, 231 recognized and processed by the mobile network, and routed to a 232 specialized PSAP where the vehicle data is available to assist the 233 call taker in assessing and responding to the situation. eCall 234 provides a standard set of vehicle, sensor (e.g., crash related), and 235 location data. 237 An eCall can be either user-initiated or automatically triggered. 238 Automatically triggered eCalls indicate a car crash or some other 239 serious incident. Manually triggered eCalls might be reports of 240 witnessed crashes or serious hazards. PSAPs might apply specific 241 operational handling to manual and automatic eCalls. 243 Legacy eCall is standardized (by 3GPP [SDO-3GPP] and CEN [CEN]) as a 244 3GPP circuit-switched call over GSM (2G) or UMTS (3G). Flags in the 245 call setup mark the call as an eCall, and further indicate if the 246 call was automatically or manually triggered. The call is routed to 247 an eCall-capable PSAP, a voice channel is established between the 248 vehicle and the PSAP, and an eCall in-band modem is used to carry a 249 defined set of vehicle, sensor (e.g., crash related), and location 250 data (the Minimum Set of Data or MSD) within the voice channel. The 251 same in-band mechanism is used for the PSAP to acknowledge successful 252 receipt of the MSD, and to request the vehicle to send a new MSD 253 (e.g., to check if the state of or location of the vehicle or its 254 occupants has changed). NG-eCall moves from circuit switched to all- 255 IP, and carries the vehicle data and eCall signaling as additional 256 data carried with the call. This document describes how IETF 257 mechanisms for IP-based emergency calls (including [RFC6443] and 258 [RFC7852]) are used to provide the signaling and data exchange of the 259 next generation of pan-European eCall. 261 The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) [SDO-ETSI] 262 has published a Technical Report titled "Mobile Standards Group 263 (MSG); eCall for VoIP" [MSG_TR] that presents findings and 264 recommendations regarding support for eCall in an all-IP environment. 265 The recommendations include the use of 3GPP IMS emergency calling 266 with additional elements identifying the call as an eCall and as 267 carrying eCall data and with mechanisms for carrying the data and 268 eCall signaling. 3GPP IMS emergency services support multimedia, 269 providing the ability to carry voice, text, and video. This 270 capability is referred to within 3GPP as Multimedia Emergency 271 Services (MMES). 273 A transition period will exist during which time the various entities 274 involved in initiating and handling an eCall might support next- 275 generation eCall, legacy eCall, or both. The issues of migration and 276 co-existence during the transition period are outside the scope of 277 this document. 279 This document indicates how to use IP-based emergency services 280 mechanisms to support next-generation eCall. 282 This document also registers MIME media types and an Emergency Call 283 Additional Data Block for the eCall vehicle data (MSD) and metadata/ 284 control data, and an INFO package to enable carrying this data in SIP 285 INFO requests. 287 The MSD is carried in the MIME type 'application/ 288 emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per' and the metadata/control block is 289 carried in the MIME type 'application/emergencyCallData.control+xml' 290 (both of which are registered in Section 14). An INFO package is 291 defined (in Section 14.10) to enable these MIME types to be carried 292 in SIP INFO requests, per [RFC6086]. 294 4. eCall Requirements 296 eCall requirements are specified by CEN in [EN_16072] and by 3GPP in 297 [TS22.101] clauses 10.7 and A.27 and [TS24.229] section 4.7.6. 298 Requirements specific to vehicle data are contained in EN 15722 299 [msd]. 301 5. Vehicle Data 303 Pan-European eCall provides a standardized and mandated set of 304 vehicle related data (including VIN, vehicle type, propulsion type, 305 current and optionally previous location coordinates, and number of 306 occupants), known as the Minimum Set of Data (MSD). The European 307 Committee for Standardization (CEN) has specified this data in EN 308 15722 [msd], along with both ASN.1 and XML encodings. Both circuit- 309 switched eCall and this document use the ASN.1 PER encoding, which is 310 specified in Annex A of EN 15722 [msd] (the XML encoding specified in 311 Annex C is not used in this document, per 3GPP [SDO-3GPP]). 313 This document registers the 'application/ 314 emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per' MIME media type to enable the MSD to 315 be carried in SIP. As an ASN.1 PER encoded object, the data is 316 binary and transported using binary content transfer encoding within 317 SIP messages. This document also adds the 'eCall.MSD' entry to the 318 Emergency Call Additional Data Types registry to enable the MSD to be 319 recognized as such in a SIP-based eCall emergency call. (See 320 [RFC7852] for more information about the registry and how it is 321 used.) 323 See Section 6 for a discussion of how the MSD vehicle data is 324 conveyed in an NG-eCall. 326 6. Data Transport 328 [RFC7852] establishes a general mechanism for conveying blocks of 329 data within a SIP emergency call. This document makes use of that 330 mechanism to include vehicle data (the MSD, see Section 5) and/or 331 metadata/control information (see Section 9) within SIP messages. 332 This document also registers an INFO package (in Section 14.10) to 333 enable eCall related data blocks to be carried in SIP INFO requests 334 (per [RFC6086], new INFO usages require the definition of an INFO 335 package). 337 Note that if other data sets need to be transmitted in the future, 338 the appropriate signalling mechanism for such data needs to be 339 evaluated, including factors such as the size and frequency of such 340 data. 342 An In-Vehicle System (IVS) transmits an MSD (see Section 5) by 343 encoding it per Annex A of EN 15722 [msd], and including it as a MIME 344 body part within a SIP message per [RFC7852]. The body part is 345 identified by its MIME media type ('application/ 346 emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per') in the Content-Type header field of 347 the body part. The body part is assigned a unique identifier which 348 is listed in a Content-ID header field in the body part. The SIP 349 message is marked as containing the MSD by adding (or appending to) a 350 Call-Info header field at the top level of the SIP message. This 351 Call-Info header field contains a CID URL referencing the body part's 352 unique identifier, and a 'purpose' parameter identifying the data as 353 the eCall MSD per the Emergency Call Additional Data Types registry 354 entry; the 'purpose' parameter's value is 355 'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD'. Per [RFC6086], an MSD is carried in a 356 SIP INFO request by using the INFO package defined in Section 14.10. 358 A PSAP or IVS transmits a metadata/control object (see Section 9) by 359 encoding it per the description in this document, and including it 360 within a SIP message as a MIME body part per [RFC7852]. The body 361 part is identified by its MIME media type ('application/ 362 emergencyCallData.control+xml') in the Content-Type header field of 363 the body part. The body part is assigned a unique identifier which 364 is listed in a Content-ID header field in the body part. The SIP 365 message is marked as containing the metadata/control object by adding 366 (or appending to) a Call-Info header field at the top level of the 367 SIP message. This Call-Info header field contains a CID URL 368 referencing the body part's unique identifier, and a 'purpose' 369 parameter identifying the data as an eCall metadata/control block per 370 the Emergency Call Additional Data Types registry entry; the 371 'purpose' parameter's value is 'emergencyCallData.control'. Per 372 [RFC6086], a metadata/control object is carried in a SIP INFO request 373 by using the INFO package defined in Section 14.10. 375 An MSD or a metadata/control block is always enclosed in a multipart 376 (normally multipart/mixed) body part (even if it would otherwise be 377 the only body part in the SIP message), since as of the date of this 378 document, the use of Content-ID as a SIP header field is not defined 379 (while it is defined for use as a MIME header field). 381 A body part containing an MSD or metadata/control object has a 382 Content-Disposition header field value containing "By-Reference". 384 An In-Vehicle System (IVS) initiating an NG-eCall includes an MSD as 385 a body part within the initial INVITE, and optionally also includes a 386 metadata/control object informing the PSAP of its capabilities as 387 another body part. The MSD body part (and metadata/control and PIDF- 388 LO body parts if included) have a Content-Disposition header field 389 with the value "By-Reference; handling=optional". Specifying 390 "handling=optional" prevents the SIP INVITE request from being 391 rejected if it is processed by a legacy element (e.g., a gateway 392 between SIP and circuit-switched environments) that does not 393 understand the MSD (or metadata/control object or PIDF-LO). The PSAP 394 creates a metadata/control object acknowledging receipt of the MSD 395 and includes it as a body part within the SIP final response to the 396 SIP INVITE request per [RFC7852]. A metadata/control object is sent 397 within a provisional (e.g., 180) responses. 399 A PSAP is able to reject a call while indicating that it is aware of 400 the situation by including a metadata/control object acknowledging 401 the MSD and containing "received=true" within a final response using 402 SIP response code 600 (Busy Everywhere), 486 (Busy Here), or 603 403 (Decline), per [RFC7852]. 405 If the IVS receives an acknowledgment for an MSD containing 406 "received=false", this indicates that the PSAP was unable to properly 407 decode or process the MSD. The IVS action is not defined (e.g., it 408 might only log an error). Since the PSAP is able to request an 409 updated MSD during the call, if an initial MSD is unsatisfactory in 410 any way, the PSAP can choose to request another one. 412 A PSAP can request that the vehicle send an updated MSD during a call 413 (e.g., upon manual request of the PSAP call taker who suspects 414 vehicle state may have changed.) To do so, the PSAP creates a 415 metadata/control object requesting an MSD and includes it within a 416 SIP INFO request sent within the dialog. The IVS then includes an 417 updated MSD within a SIP INFO request and sends it within the dialog. 418 If the IVS is unable to send an MSD, it instead sends a metadata/ 419 control object acknowledging the request with the 'success' parameter 420 set to 'false' and a 'reason' parameter (and optionally a 'details' 421 parameter) indicating why the request could not be accomplished. Per 422 [RFC6086], metadata/control objects and MSDs are sent using the INFO 423 package defined in Section 14.10. In addition, to align with how an 424 MSD or metadata/control block is transmitted in a SIP message other 425 than an INFO request, a Call-Info header field is included in the SIP 426 INFO request to reference the MSD or metadata/control block per 427 [RFC7852]. See Section 14.10 for information about the use of SIP 428 INFO requests to carry data within an eCall. 430 The IVS is not expected to send an unsolicited MSD after the initial 431 INVITE. 433 This document does not mandate support for the data blocks defined in 434 [RFC7852]. 436 7. Call Setup 438 In circuit-switched eCall, the IVS places a special form of a 112 439 emergency call which carries an eCall flag (indicating that the call 440 is an eCall and also if the call was manually or automatically 441 triggered); the mobile network operator (MNO) recognizes the eCall 442 flag and routes the call to an eCall-capable PSAP; vehicle data is 443 transmitted to the PSAP via the eCall in-band modem (in the voice 444 channel). 446 ///----\\\ 112 voice call with eCall flag +------+ 447 ||| IVS |||---------------------------------------->+ PSAP | 448 \\\----/// vehicle data via eCall in-band modem +------+ 450 Figure 1: circuit-switched eCall 452 For NG-eCall, the IVS establishes an emergency call using a Request- 453 URI indicating a manual or automatic eCall; the MNO (or ESInet) 454 recognizes the eCall URN and routes the call to an NG-eCall capable 455 PSAP; the PSAP interpets the vehicle data sent with the call and 456 makes it available to the call taker. 458 ///----\\\ IMS emergency call with eCall URN +------+ 459 IVS ----------------------------------------->+ PSAP | 460 \\\----/// vehicle data included in call setup +------+ 462 Figure 2: NG-eCall 464 See Section 6 for information on how the MSD is transported within an 465 NG-eCall. 467 This document registers new service URN children within the "sos" 468 subservice. These URNs provide the mechanism by which an eCall is 469 identified, and differentiate between manually and automatically 470 triggered eCalls (which might be subject to different treatment, 471 depending on policy). The two service URNs are: 472 urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic and urn:service:sos.ecall.manual, 473 which requests resources associated with an emergency call placed by 474 an in-vehicle system, carrying a standardized set of data related to 475 the vehicle and incident. 477 Call routing is outside the scope of this document. 479 8. Test Calls 481 eCall requires the ability to place test calls (see [TS22.101] clause 482 10.7 and [EN_16062] clause 7.2.2). These are calls that are 483 recognized and treated to some extent as eCalls but are not given 484 emergency call treatment and are not handled by call takers. The 485 specific handling of test eCalls is not itself standardized; 486 typically, the test call facility allows the IVS or user to verify 487 that an eCall can be successfully established with voice 488 communication. The IVS might also be able to verify that the MSD was 489 successfully received. 491 A service URN starting with "test." indicates a test call. For 492 eCall, "urn:service:test.sos.ecall" indicates such a test feature. 493 This functionality is defined in [RFC6881]. 495 This document registers "urn:service:test.sos.ecall" for eCall test 496 calls. 498 The circuit switched eCall test call facility is a non-emergency 499 number so does not get treated as an emergency call. For NG-eCall, 500 MNOs, emergency authorities, and PSAPs can determine how to treat a 501 vehicle call requesting the "test" service URN so that the desired 502 functionality is tested, but this is outside the scope of this 503 document. 505 9. The Metadata/Control Object 507 eCall requires the ability for the PSAP to acknowledge successful 508 receipt of an MSD sent by the IVS, and for the PSAP to request that 509 the IVS send an MSD (e.g., the call taker can initiate a request for 510 a new MSD to see if there have been changes in the vehicle's state, 511 e.g., location, direction, number of fastened seatbelts). 513 This document defines a block of metadata/control data as an XML 514 structure containing elements used for eCall and other related 515 emergency call systems and extension points. (This metadata/control 516 block is in effect a high-level protocol between the PSAP and IVS.) 517 When the PSAP sends a metadata/control block in response to data sent 518 by the IVS in a SIP request other than INFO (e.g., the MSD in the 519 initial INVITE), the metadata/control block is sent in the SIP 520 response to that request (e.g., the response to the INVITE request). 521 When the PSAP sends a control block in other circumstances (e.g., 522 mid-call), the control block is transmitted from the PSAP to the IVS 523 in a SIP INFO request within the established dialog. The IVS sends 524 the requested data (the MSD) in a new SIP INFO request (per 526 [RFC6086]). This mechanism flexibly allows the PSAP to send eCall- 527 specific data to the IVS and the IVS to respond. SIP INFO requests 528 are sent using an appropriate SIP INFO Package. See Section 6 for 529 more information on sending a metadata/control block within a SIP 530 message. See Section 14.10 for information about the use of SIP INFO 531 requests to carry data within an eCall. 533 When the IVS includes an unsolicited MSD in a SIP request (e.g., the 534 initial INVITE), the PSAP sends a metadata/control block indicating 535 successful/unsuccessful receipt of the MSD in the SIP response to the 536 request. This also informs the IVS that an NG-eCall is in operation. 537 If the IVS receives a SIP final response without the metadata/control 538 block, it indicates that the SIP dialog is not an NG-eCall (e.g., 539 some part of the call is being handled as a legacy call). When the 540 IVS sends a solicited MSD (e.g., in a SIP INFO request sent following 541 receipt of a SIP INFO request containing a metadata/control block 542 requesting an MSD), the PSAP does not send a metadata/control block 543 indicating successful or unsuccessful receipt of the MSD. (Normal 544 SIP retransmission handles non-receipt of requested data; note that, 545 per [RFC6086], a 200 OK response to a SIP INFO request indicates only 546 that the receiver has successfully received and accepted the SIP INFO 547 request, it says nothing about the acceptability of the payload.) If 548 the IVS receives a request to send an MSD but it is unable to do so 549 for any reason, the IVS sends a metadata/control object acknowledging 550 the request and containing "success=false" and "reason" set to an 551 appropriate code. 553 This provides flexibility to handle various circumstances. For 554 example, if a PSAP is unable to accept an eCall (e.g., due to 555 overload or too many calls from the same location), it can reject the 556 INVITE. Since a metadata/control object is also included in the SIP 557 response that rejects the call, the IVS knows if the PSAP received 558 the MSD, and can inform the vehicle occupants that the PSAP 559 successfully received the vehicle location and information but can't 560 talk to the occupants at that time. Especially for SIP response 561 codes that indicate an inability to conduct a call (as opposed to a 562 technical inability to process the request), the IVS can also 563 determine that the call was successful on a technical level (e.g., 564 not helpful to retry as circuit-switched). (Note that there could be 565 edge cases where the PSAP response is not received by the IVS, e.g., 566 if an intermediary sends a CANCEL, and an error response is forwarded 567 towards the IVS before the error response from the PSAP is received, 568 the response will be dropped, but these are unlikely to occur here.) 570 The metadata/control block is carried in the MIME type 'application/ 571 emergencyCallData.control+xml'. 573 The metadata/control block is designed for use with pan-European 574 eCall and also eCall-like systems (i.e., in other regions), and has 575 extension points. Note that eCall-like systems might define their 576 own vehicle data blocks, and so might need to register a new INFO 577 package to accomodate the new data MIME media type and the metadata/ 578 control object. 580 9.1. The Control Block 582 The control block is an XML data structure allowing for 583 acknowledgments, requests, and capabilities information. It is 584 carried in a body part with a specific MIME media type. Three 585 elements are defined for use within a control block: 587 ack Acknowledges receipt of data or a request. 589 capabilities Used in a control block sent from the IVS to the PSAP 590 (e.g., in the initial INVITE) to inform the PSAP of the 591 vehicle capabilities. Child elements contain all 592 actions and data types supported by the vehicle. It is 593 OPTIONAL for the IVS to send this block. Omitting the 594 block indicates that the IVS supports only the 595 mandatory functionality defined in this document. 597 request Used in a control block sent by the PSAP to the IVS, to 598 request the vehicle to perform an action. 600 The element indicates the object being acknowledged and reports 601 success or failure. 603 The element contains attributes to indicate the request and 604 to supply related information. The 'action' attribute is mandatory 605 and indicates the specific action. An IANA registry is created in 606 Section 14.9.1 to contain the allowed values. 608 The element has child elements to indicate 609 the actions supported by the IVS. 611 9.1.1. The element 613 The element acknowledges receipt of an eCall data object or 614 request. An element references the Content-ID of the object 615 being acknowledged. The PSAP MUST send an element 616 acknowledging receipt of an unsolicited MSD (e.g., sent by the IVS in 617 the INVITE); this element indicates if the PSAP considers the 618 MSD successfully received or not. An element is not sent for a 619 element. 621 The element has the following attributes: 623 9.1.1.1. Attributes of the element 625 The element has the following attributes: 627 Name: ref 628 Usage: Mandatory 629 Type: anyURI 630 Direction: Sent in either direction 631 Description: References the Content-ID of the body part being 632 acknowledged. 633 Example: 635 Name: received 636 Usage: Conditional: mandatory in an element sent by a PSAP 637 Type: Boolean 638 Direction: In this document, sent from the PSAP to the IVS 639 Description: Indicates if the referenced object was considered 640 successfully received or not. 641 Example: 643 9.1.1.2. Child Element of the element 645 For extensibility, the element has the following child element: 647 Name: actionResult 648 Usage: Optional 649 Direction: Sent from the IVS to the PSAP 650 Description: An element indicates the result of an 651 action (other than a successfully executed 'send-data' action). 652 The element contains an element for each 653 element that is not a successfully executed 'send-data' 654 action. The element has the following attributes: 656 Name: action 657 Usage: Mandatory 658 Type: token 659 Description: Contains the value of the 'action' attribute of the 660 element 662 Name: success 663 Usage: Mandatory 664 Type: Boolean 665 Description: Indicates if the action was successfully 666 accomplished 668 Name: reason 669 Usage: Conditional 670 Type: token 671 Description: Used when 'success' is "false", this attribute 672 contains a reason code for a failure. A registry for reason 673 codes is defined in Section 14.9.2. The initial values are: 674 damaged (required components are damaged), data-unsupported 675 (the data item referenced in a 'send-data' request is not 676 supported), security-failure (the authenticity of the request 677 or the authority of the requestor could not be verified), 678 unable (a generic error for use when no other code is 679 appropriate), and unsupported (the 'action' value is not 680 supported). 682 Name: details 683 Usage: optional 684 Type: string 685 Description: Contains further explanation of the circumstances of 686 a success or failure. The contents are implementation-specific 687 and human-readable. 689 9.1.1.3. Ack Examples 691 692 696 698 700 Figure 3: Ack Example from PSAP to IVS 702 9.1.2. The element 704 The element is transmitted by the IVS to indicate to 705 the PSAP its capabilities. No attributes for this element are 706 currently defined. The following child elements are defined: 708 9.1.2.1. Child Elements of the element 710 The element has the following child elements: 712 Name: request 713 Usage: Mandatory 714 Description: The element contains a child 715 element per action supported by the vehicle. 717 Examples: 718 720 It is OPTIONAL for the IVS to support the element. If 721 the IVS does not send a element, this indicates that 722 the only action supported by the IVS is 'send-data' with 723 'datatype' set to 'eCall.MSD'. 725 9.1.2.2. Capabilities Example 727 728 732 733 734 736 738 Figure 4: Capabilities Example 740 9.1.3. The element 742 A element appears one or more times on its own or as a 743 child of a element. It allows the PSAP to request 744 that the IVS perform an action. The only action that MUST be 745 supported is to send an MSD. The following attributes and child 746 elements are defined: 748 9.1.3.1. Attributes of the element 750 The element has the following attributes: 752 Name: action 753 Usage: Mandatory 754 Type: token 755 Direction: Sent in either direction 756 Description: Identifies the action that the vehicle is requested to 757 perform (in a element within a element, 758 indicates an action that the vehicle is capable of performing). 760 An IANA registry is established in Section 14.9.1 to contain the 761 allowed values. 762 Example: action="send-data" 764 Name: int-id 765 Usage: Conditional 766 Type: int 767 Direction: Sent in either direction 768 Description: Defined for extensibility. Documents that make use of 769 it are expected to explain when it is required and how it it used. 770 Example: int-id="3" 772 Name: persistence 773 Usage: Optional 774 Type: duration 775 Direction: Sent in either direction 776 Description: Defined for extensibility. Specifies how long to carry 777 on the specified action. If absent, the default is for the 778 duration of the call. 779 Example: persistence="PT1H" 781 Name: datatype 782 Usage: Conditional 783 Type: token 784 Direction: Sent in either direction 785 Description: Mandatory with a "send-data" action within a 786 element that is not within a element. Specifies 787 the data block that the IVS is requested to transmit, using the 788 same identifier as in the 'purpose' attribute set in a Call-Info 789 header field to point to the data block. Permitted values are 790 contained in the 'Emergency Call Data Types' IANA registry 791 established in [RFC7852]. Only the "eCall.MSD" value is mandatory 792 to support. 793 Example: datatype="eCall.MSD" 795 Name: supported-values 796 Usage: Conditional 797 Type: string 798 Direction: Sent from the IVS to the PSAP 799 Description: Defined for extensibility. Used in a element 800 that is a child of a element, this attribute lists 801 all supported values of the action type. Permitted values depend 802 on the action value. Multiple values are separated with a 803 semicolon. Documents that make use of it are expected to explain 804 when it is is required, the permitted values, and how it it used. 806 Name: requested-state 807 Usage: Conditional 808 Type: token 809 Direction: Sent from the PSAP to the IVS 810 Description: Defined for extension. Indicates the requested state 811 of an element associated with the request type. Permitted values 812 depend on the request type. Documents that make use of it are 813 expected to explain when it is is required, the permitted values, 814 and how it it used. 816 Name: element-id 817 Usage: Conditional 818 Type: token 819 Direction: Sent from the PSAP to the IVS 820 Description: Defined for extension. Identifies the element to be 821 acted on. Permitted values depend on the request type. Documents 822 that make use of it are expected to explain when it is is 823 required, the permitted values, and how it it used. 825 9.1.3.2. Request Example 827 828 832 834 836 Figure 5: Request Example 838 10. Examples 840 Figure 6 illustrates an eCall. The call uses the request URI 841 'urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic' service URN and is recognized as an 842 eCall, and further as one that was invoked automatically by the IVS 843 due to a crash or other serious incident. In this example, the 844 originating network routes the call to an ESInet which routes the 845 call to the appropriate NG-eCall capable PSAP. The emergency call is 846 received by the ESInet's Emergency Services Routing Proxy (ESRP), as 847 the entry point into the ESInet. The ESRP routes the call to a PSAP, 848 where it is received by a call taker. In deployments where there is 849 no ESInet, the originating network routes the call directly to the 850 appropriate NG-eCall capable PSAP, an illustration of which would be 851 identical to the one below except without an ESInet or ESRP. 853 +------------+ +---------------------------------------+ 854 | | | +-------+ | 855 | | | | PSAP2 | | 856 | | | +-------+ | 857 | | | | 858 | | | +------+ +-------+ | 859 Vehicle-->| |--+->| ESRP |---->| PSAP1 |--> Call-Taker | 860 | | | +------+ +-------+ | 861 | | | | 862 | | | +-------+ | 863 | | | | PSAP3 | | 864 | Originating| | +-------+ | 865 | Mobile | | | 866 | Network | | ESInet | 867 +------------+ +---------------------------------------+ 869 Figure 6: Example of NG-eCall Message Flow 871 Figure 7 illustrates an eCall call flow with a mid-call PSAP request 872 for an updated MSD. The call flow shows the IVS initiating an 873 emergency call, including the MSD in the INVITE. The PSAP includes 874 in the 200 OK response a metadata/control object acknowledging 875 receipt of the MSD. During the call, the PSAP sends a request for an 876 MSD in an INFO request. The IVS sends the requested MSD in a new 877 INFO request. 879 IVS PSAP 880 |(1) INVITE (eCall MSD) | 881 |------------------------------------------->| 882 | | 883 |(2) 200 OK (eCall metadata [ack MSD]) | 884 |<-------------------------------------------| 885 | | 886 |(3) start media stream(s) | 887 |............................................| 888 | | 889 |(4) INFO (eCall metadata [request MSD]) | 890 |<-------------------------------------------| 891 | | 892 |(5) 200 OK | 893 |------------------------------------------->| 894 | | 895 |(6) INFO (eCall MSD) | 896 |------------------------------------------->| 897 | | 898 |(7) 200 OK | 899 |<-------------------------------------------| 900 | | 901 |(8) BYE | 902 |<-------------------------------------------| 903 | | 904 |(9) end media streams | 905 |............................................| 906 | | 907 |(10) 200 OK | 908 |------------------------------------------->| 910 Figure 7: NG-eCall Call Flow Illustration 912 The example, shown in Figure 8, illustrates a SIP eCall INVITE 913 request containing an MSD. For simplicity, the example does not show 914 all SIP headers, nor the SDP contents, nor does it show any 915 additional data blocks added by the IVS or the originating mobile 916 network. Because the MSD is encoded in ASN.1 PER, which is a binary 917 encoding, its contents cannot be included in a text document. 919 INVITE urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic SIP/2.0 920 To: urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic 921 From: ;tag=9fxced76sl 922 Call-ID: 3848276298220188511@atlanta.example.com 923 Geolocation: 924 Geolocation-Routing: no 925 Call-Info: ; 926 purpose=emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 927 Accept: application/sdp, application/pidf+xml, 928 application/emergencyCallData.control+xml 929 CSeq: 31862 INVITE 930 Recv-Info: emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 931 Allow: INVITE, ACK, PRACK, INFO, OPTIONS, CANCEL, REFER, BYE, 932 SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, UPDATE 933 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundary1 934 Content-Length: ... 936 --boundary1 937 Content-Type: application/sdp 939 ...Session Description Protocol (SDP) goes here... 941 --boundary1 942 Content-Type: application/pidf+xml 943 Content-ID: 944 Content-Disposition: by-reference;handling=optional 946 ...PIDF-LO goes in here 948 --boundary1 949 Content-Type: application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per 950 Content-ID: <1234567890@atlanta.example.com> 951 Content-Disposition: by-reference;handling=optional 953 ...MSD in ASN.1 PER encoding goes here... 955 --boundary1-- 957 Figure 8: SIP NG-eCall INVITE 959 Continuing the example, Figure 9 illustrates a SIP 200 OK response to 960 the INVITE request of Figure 8, containing a control block 961 acknowledging successful receipt of the eCall MSD. (For simplicity, 962 the example does not show all SIP headers.) 963 SIP/2.0 200 OK 964 To: urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic;tag=8gydfe65t0 965 From: ;tag=9fxced76sl 966 Call-ID: 3848276298220188511@atlanta.example.com 967 Call-Info: ; 968 purpose=emergencyCallData.control 969 Accept: application/sdp, application/pidf+xml, 970 application/emergencyCallData.control+xml, 971 application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per 972 CSeq: 31862 INVITE 973 Recv-Info: emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 974 Allow: INVITE, ACK, PRACK, INFO, OPTIONS, CANCEL, REFER, BYE, 975 SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, UPDATE 976 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundaryX 977 Content-Length: ... 979 --boundaryX 980 Content-Type: application/sdp 982 ...Session Description Protocol (SDP) goes here... 984 --boundaryX 985 Content-Type: application/emergencyCallData.control+xml 986 Content-ID: <2345678901@atlanta.example.com> 987 Content-Disposition: by-reference 989 990 994 995 997 --boundaryX-- 999 Figure 9: 200 OK response to INVITE 1001 Figure 10 illustrates a SIP INFO request containing a metadata/ 1002 control block requesting an eCall MSD. (For simplicity, the example 1003 does not show all SIP headers.) 1004 INFO sip:+13145551111@example.com SIP/2.0 1005 To: ;tag=9fxced76sl 1006 From: Exemplar PSAP ;tag=8gydfe65t0 1007 Call-ID: 3848276298220188511@atlanta.example.com 1008 Call-Info: ; 1009 purpose=emergencyCallData.control 1010 CSeq: 41862 INFO 1011 Info-Package: emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 1012 Allow: INVITE, ACK, PRACK, INFO, OPTIONS, CANCEL, REFER, BYE, 1013 SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, UPDATE 1014 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundaryZZZ 1015 Content-Dispositio: Info-Package 1016 Content-Length: ... 1018 --boundaryZZZ 1019 Content-Disposition: by-reference 1020 Content-Type: application/emergencyCallData.control+xml 1021 Content-ID: <3456789012@atlanta.example.com> 1023 1024 1028 1030 1031 --boundaryZZZ-- 1033 Figure 10: INFO requesting MSD 1035 Figure 11 illustrates a SIP INFO request containing an MSD. For 1036 simplicity, the example does not show all SIP headers. Because the 1037 MSD is encoded in ASN.1 PER, which is a binary encoding, its contents 1038 cannot be included in a text document. 1040 INFO urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic SIP/2.0 1041 To: urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic;tag=8gydfe65t0 1042 From: ;tag=9fxced76sl 1043 Call-ID: 3848276298220188511@atlanta.example.com 1044 Call-Info: ; 1045 purpose=emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 1046 CSeq: 51862 INFO 1047 Info-Package: emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 1048 Allow: INVITE, ACK, PRACK, INFO, OPTIONS, CANCEL, REFER, BYE, 1049 SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, UPDATE 1050 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundaryLine 1051 Content-Disposition: Info-Package 1052 Content-Length: ... 1054 --boundaryLine 1055 Content-Type: application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per 1056 Content-ID: <4567890123@atlanta.example.com> 1057 Content-Disposition: by-reference 1059 ...MSD in ASN.1 PER encoding goes here... 1061 --boundaryLine-- 1063 Figure 11: INFO containing MSD 1065 11. Security Considerations 1067 The security considerations described in [RFC5069] apply here. 1069 In addition to any network-provided location (which might be 1070 determined solely by the network, or in cooperation with or possibly 1071 entirely by the originating device), an eCall carries an IVS-supplied 1072 location within the MSD. This is likely to be useful to the PSAP, 1073 especially when no network-provided location is included, or when the 1074 two locations are independently determined. Even in situations where 1075 the network-supplied location is limited to the cell site, this can 1076 be useful as a sanity check on the device-supplied location contained 1077 in the MSD. 1079 The document [RFC7378] discusses trust issues regarding location 1080 provided by or determined in cooperation with end devices. 1082 Security considerations specific to the mechanism by which the PSAP 1083 sends acknowledgments and requests to the vehicle are discussed in 1084 the "Security Considerations" block of Section 14.4. Note that an 1085 attacker that has access to and is capable of generating a response 1086 to the initial INVITE request could generate a 600 (Busy Everywhere), 1087 486 (Busy Here), or 603 (Decline) response that includes a metadata/ 1088 control object containing a reference to the MSD in the initial 1089 INVITE and a "received=true" field, which could result in the IVS 1090 perceiving the PSAP to be overloaded and hence not attempting to 1091 reinitiate the call. The risk can be mitigated as discussed in the 1092 "Security Considerations" block of Section 14.4. 1094 Data received from external sources inherently carries implementation 1095 risks. For example, depending on the platform, buffer overflows can 1096 introduce remote code execution vulnerabilities, null characters can 1097 corrupt strings, numeric values used for internal calculations can 1098 result in underflow/overflow errors, malformed XML objects can expose 1099 parsing bugs, etc. Implementations need to be cognizant of the 1100 potential risks, observe best practices (which might include 1101 sufficiently capable static code analysis, fuzz testing, component 1102 isolation, avoiding use of unsafe coding techniques, third-party 1103 attack tests, signed software, over-the-air updates, etc.), and have 1104 multiple levels of protection. Implementors need to be aware that, 1105 potentially, the data objects described here and elsewhere (including 1106 the MSD and metadata/control objects) might be malformed, might 1107 contain unexpected characters, excessively long attribute values, 1108 elements, etc. 1110 The security considerations discussed in [RFC7852] apply here (see 1111 especially the discussion of TLS, TLS versions, cypher suites, and 1112 PKI). 1114 When vehicle data or control/metadata is contained in a signed or 1115 encrypted body part, the enclosing multipart (e.g., multipart/signed 1116 or multipart/encrypted) has the same Content-ID as the enclosed data 1117 part. This allows an entity to identify and access the data blocks 1118 it is interested in without having to dive deeply into the message 1119 structure or decrypt parts it is not interested in. (The 'purpose' 1120 parameter in a Call-Info header field identifies the data and 1121 contains a CID URL pointing to the data block in the body, which has 1122 a matching Content-ID body part header field). 1124 12. Privacy Considerations 1126 The privacy considerations discussed in [RFC7852] apply here. The 1127 MSD carries some identifying and personal information (mostly about 1128 the vehicle and less about the owner), as well as location 1129 information, and so needs to be protected against unauthorized 1130 disclosure. Local regulations may impose additional privacy 1131 protection requirements. 1133 Privacy considerations specific to the data structure containing 1134 vehicle information are discussed in the "Security Considerations" 1135 block of Section 14.3. 1137 Privacy considerations specific to the mechanism by which the PSAP 1138 sends acknowledgments and requests to the vehicle are discussed in 1139 the "Security Considerations" block of Section 14.4. 1141 13. XML Schema 1143 This section defines an XML schema for the control block. The text 1144 description of the control block in Section 9.1 is normative and 1145 supersedes any conflicting aspect of this schema. 1147 1148 1150 1158 1160 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1169 1170 1171 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1186 1187 1190 1193 1195 1196 1197 conditionally mandatory 1198 when @success="false" 1199 to indicate reason code 1200 for a failure 1201 1202 1203 1204 1206 1208 1209 1210 1213 1214 1217 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1233 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1249 1250 1252 1253 1255 1256 1258 1259 1261 1262 1263 1264 1266 1268 Figure 12: Control Block Schema 1270 14. IANA Considerations 1272 14.1. The EmergencyCallData Media Subtree 1274 This document establishes the "EmergencyCallData" media (MIME) 1275 subtype tree, a new media subtree rooted at "application/ 1276 EmergencyCallData". This subtree is used only for content associated 1277 with emergency communications. New subtypes in this subtree follow 1278 the rules specified in Section 3.1 of [RFC6838], with the additional 1279 restriction that the standards-related organization MUST be 1280 responsible for some aspect of emergency communications. 1282 This subtree initially contains the following subtypes (defined here 1283 or in [RFC7852]): 1285 emergencyCallData.control+xm 1286 EmergencyCallData.Comment+xm 1287 EmergencyCallData.DeviceInfo+xml 1288 EmergencyCallData.MSD+per 1289 EmergencyCallData.ProviderInfo+xml 1290 EmergencyCallData.ServiceInfo+xml 1291 EmergencyCallData.SubscriberInfo+xml 1293 14.2. Service URN Registrations 1295 IANA is requested to register the URN 'urn:service:sos.ecall' under 1296 the sub-services 'sos' registry defined in Section 4.2 of [RFC5031]. 1298 This service requests resources associated with an emergency call 1299 placed by an in-vehicle system, carrying a standardized set of data 1300 related to the vehicle and incident. Two sub-services are registered 1301 as well: 1303 urn:service:sos.ecall.manual 1305 Used with an eCall invoked due to manual interaction by a vehicle 1306 occupant. 1308 urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic 1310 Used with an eCall invoked automatically, for example, due to a 1311 crash or other serious incident. 1313 IANA is also requested to register the URN 1314 'urn:service:test.sos.ecall' under the sub-service 'test' registry 1315 defined in Setcion 17.2 of [RFC6881]. This service requests 1316 resources associated with a test (non-emergency) call placed by an 1317 in-vehicle system. See Section 8 for more information on the test 1318 eCall request URN. 1320 14.3. MIME Media Type Registration for 'application/ 1321 emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per' 1323 IANA is requested to add application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per 1324 as a MIME media type, with a reference to this document, in 1325 accordance to the procedures of RFC 6838 [RFC6838] and guidelines in 1326 RFC 7303 [RFC7303]. 1328 MIME media type name: application 1330 MIME subtype name: emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per 1332 Mandatory parameters: none 1334 Optional parameters: none 1336 Encoding scheme: binary 1338 Encoding considerations: Uses ASN.1 PER, which is a binary 1339 encoding; when transported in SIP, binary content transfer 1340 encoding is used. 1342 Security considerations: This media type is designed to carry 1343 vehicle and incident-related data during an emergency call. This 1344 data contains personal information including vehicle VIN, 1345 location, direction, etc. Appropriate precautions need to be 1346 taken to limit unauthorized access, inappropriate disclosure to 1347 third parties, and eavesdropping of this information. Sections 9 1348 and Section 10 of [RFC7852] contain more discussion. 1350 Interoperability considerations: None 1352 Published specification: Annex A of EN 15722 [msd] 1354 Applications which use this media type: Pan-European eCall 1355 compliant systems 1357 Additional information: None 1359 Magic Number: None 1361 File Extension: None 1363 Macintosh file type code: 'BINA' 1365 Person and email address for further information: Randall Gellens, 1366 rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org 1368 Intended usage: LIMITED USE 1370 Author: The MSD specification was produced by the European 1371 Committee For Standardization (CEN). For contact information, 1372 please see . 1374 Change controller: The European Committee For Standardization 1375 (CEN) 1377 14.4. MIME Media Type Registration for 'application/ 1378 emergencyCallData.control+xml' 1380 IANA is requested to add application/emergencyCallData.control+xml as 1381 a MIME media type, with a reference to this document, in accordance 1382 to the procedures of RFC 6838 [RFC6838] and guidelines in RFC 7303 1383 [RFC7303]. 1385 MIME media type name: application 1387 MIME subtype name: emergencyCallData.control+xml 1389 Mandatory parameters: none 1391 Optional parameters: charset 1393 Indicates the character encoding of the XML content. 1395 Encoding considerations: Uses XML, which can employ 8-bit 1396 characters, depending on the character encoding used. See 1397 Section 3.2 of RFC 7303 [RFC7303]. 1399 Security considerations: 1401 This media type carries metadata and control information and 1402 requests, such as from a Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) 1403 to an In-Vehicle System (IVS) during an emergency call. 1405 Metadata (such as an acknowledgment that data sent by the IVS 1406 to the PSAP was successfully received) has limited privacy and 1407 security implications. Control information (such as requests 1408 from the PSAP that the vehicle perform an action) has some 1409 privacy and security implications. The privacy concern arises 1410 from the ability to request the vehicle to transmit a data set, 1411 which as described in Section 14.3, can contain personal 1412 information. The security concern is the ability to request 1413 the vehicle to perform an action. Control information needs to 1414 originate only from a PSAP or other emergency services 1415 provider, and not be modified en-route. The level of integrity 1416 of the cellular network over which the emergency call is placed 1417 is a consideration: when the IVS initiates an eCall over a 1418 cellular network, in most cases it relies on the MNO to route 1419 the call to a PSAP. (Calls placed using other means, such as 1420 Wi-Fi or over-the-top services, generally incur somewhat higher 1421 levels of risk than calls placed "natively" using cellular 1422 networks.) A call-back from a PSAP merits additional 1423 consideration, since current mechanisms are not ideal for 1424 verifying that such a call is indeed a call-back from a PSAP in 1425 response to an emergency call placed by the IVS. See the 1426 discussion in Section 11 and the PSAP Callback document 1427 [RFC7090]. 1429 Sections 7 and Section 8 of [RFC7852] contain more discussion. 1431 Interoperability considerations: None 1433 Published specification: This document 1435 Applications which use this media type: Pan-European eCall 1436 compliant systems 1438 Additional information: None 1440 Magic Number: None 1442 File Extension: .xml 1444 Macintosh file type code: 'TEXT' 1446 Person and email address for further information: Randall Gellens, 1447 rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org 1449 Intended usage: LIMITED USE 1451 Author: The IETF ECRIT WG. 1453 Change controller: The IETF ECRIT WG. 1455 14.5. Registration of the 'eCall.MSD' entry in the Emergency Call 1456 Additional Data Types registry 1458 This specification requests IANA to add the 'eCall.MSD' entry to the 1459 Emergency Call Additional Data Types registry, with a reference to 1460 this document; the 'Data About' value is 'The Call'. 1462 14.6. Registration of the 'control' entry in the Emergency Call 1463 Additional Data Types registry 1465 This specification requests IANA to add the 'control' entry to the 1466 Emergency Call Additional Data Types registry, with a reference to 1467 this document; the 'Data About' value is 'The Call'. 1469 14.7. Registration of the emergencyCallData.eCall Info Package 1471 IANA is requested to add emergencyCallData.eCall to the Info Packages 1472 Registry under "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Parameters", with a 1473 reference to this document. 1475 14.8. URN Sub-Namespace Registration 1477 14.8.1. Registration for urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eCall 1479 This section registers a new XML namespace, as per the guidelines in 1480 RFC 3688 [RFC3688]. 1482 URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:eCall 1484 Registrant Contact: IETF, ECRIT working group, , as 1485 delegated by the IESG . 1487 XML: 1489 BEGIN 1490 1491 1493 1494 1495 1497 Namespace for eCall Data 1498 1499 1500

Namespace for eCall Data

1501

See [TBD: This document].

1502 1503 1504 END 1506 14.8.2. Registration for urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:control 1508 This section registers a new XML namespace, as per the guidelines in 1509 RFC 3688 [RFC3688]. 1511 URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:control 1513 Registrant Contact: IETF, ECRIT working group, , as 1514 delegated by the IESG . 1516 XML: 1518 BEGIN 1519 1520 1522 1523 1524 1526 Namespace for eCall Data: 1527 Control Block 1528 1529 1530

Namespace for eCall Data

1531

Control Block

1532

See [TBD: This document].

1533 1534 1535 END 1537 14.9. Registry Creation 1539 This document creates a new registry called "Emergency Call Metadata/ 1540 Control Data". The following sub-registries are created for this 1541 registry. 1543 14.9.1. Emergency Call Action Registry 1545 This document creates a new sub-registry called "Emergency Call 1546 Action". As defined in [RFC5226], this registry operates under 1547 "Expert Review" rules. The expert should determine that the proposed 1548 action is within the purview of a vehicle, is sufficiently 1549 distinguishable from other actions, and the action is clearly and 1550 fully described. In most cases, a published and stable document is 1551 referenced for the description of the action. 1553 The content of this registry includes: 1555 Name: The identifier to be used in the 'action' attribute of a 1556 control element. 1558 Description: A description of the action. In most cases this will 1559 be a reference to a published and stable document. The 1560 description MUST specify if any attributes or child elements are 1561 optional or mandatory, and describe the action to be taken by the 1562 vehicle. 1564 The initial set of values is listed in Table 2. 1566 +-----------+--------------------------------------+ 1567 | Name | Description | 1568 +-----------+--------------------------------------+ 1569 | send-data | See Section 9.1.3.1 of this document | 1570 +-----------+--------------------------------------+ 1572 Table 2: Emergency Call Action Registry Initial Values 1574 14.9.2. Emergency Call Action Failure Reason Registry 1576 This document creates a new sub-registry called "Emergency Call 1577 Action Failure Reason" which contains values for the 'reason' 1578 attribute of the element. As defined in [RFC5226], 1579 this registry operates under "Expert Review" rules. The expert 1580 should determine that the proposed reason is sufficiently 1581 distinguishable from other reasons and that the proposed description 1582 is understandable and correctly worded. 1584 The content of this registry includes: 1586 ID: A short string identifying the reason, for use in the 'reason' 1587 attribute of an element. 1589 Description: A description of the reason. 1591 The initial set of values is listed in Table 3. 1593 +------------------+------------------------------------------------+ 1594 | ID | Description | 1595 +------------------+------------------------------------------------+ 1596 | damaged | Required components are damaged. | 1597 | | | 1598 | data-unsupported | The data item referenced in a 'send-data' | 1599 | | request is not supported. | 1600 | | | 1601 | security-failure | The authenticity of the request or the | 1602 | | authority of the requestor could not be | 1603 | | verified. | 1604 | | | 1605 | unable | The action could not be accomplished (a | 1606 | | generic error for use when no other code is | 1607 | | appropriate). | 1608 | | | 1609 | unsupported | The 'action' value is not supported. | 1610 +------------------+------------------------------------------------+ 1612 Table 3: Emergency Call Action Failure Reason Registry Initial Values 1614 14.10. The emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO package 1616 This document registers the 'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' INFO 1617 package. 1619 Both endpoints (the IVS and the PSAP equipment) include 1620 'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' in a Recv-Info header field per 1621 [RFC6086] to indicate ability to receive INFO requests carrying data 1622 as described here. 1624 Support for the 'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' INFO package indicates 1625 the ability to receive eCall related body parts as specified in [TBD: 1626 THIS DOCUMENT]. 1628 An INFO request message carrying body parts related to an emergency 1629 call as described in [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] has an Info-Package header 1630 field set to 'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' per [RFC6086]. 1632 The requirements of Section 10 of [RFC6086] are addressed in the 1633 following sections. 1635 14.10.1. Overall Description 1637 This section describes "what type of information is carried in INFO 1638 requests associated with the Info Package, and for what types of 1639 applications and functionalities UAs can use the Info Package." 1640 INFO requests associated with the emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO 1641 package carry data associated with emergency calls as defined in 1642 [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT]. The application is vehicle-initiated emergency 1643 calls established using SIP. The functionality is to carry vehicle 1644 data and metadata/control information between vehicles and PSAPs. 1645 Refer to [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] for more information. 1647 14.10.2. Applicability 1649 This section describes "why the Info Package mechanism, rather than 1650 some other mechanism, has been chosen for the specific use-case...." 1652 The use of the SIP INFO method is based on an analysis of the 1653 requirements against the intent and effects of the INFO method versus 1654 other approaches (which included the SIP MESSAGE method, the SIP 1655 OPTIONS method, the SIP re-INVITE method, media plane transport, and 1656 non-SIP protocols). In particular, the transport of emergency call 1657 data blocks occurs within a SIP emergency dialog, per Section 6, and 1658 is normally carried in the initial INVITE request and response; the 1659 use of the SIP INFO method only occurs when emergency-call-related 1660 data needs to be sent mid-call. While the SIP MESSAGE method could 1661 be used, it is not tied to a SIP dialog as is the SIP INFO method and 1662 thus might not be associated with the dialog. Either the SIP OPTIONS 1663 or re-INVITE methods could also be used, but is seen as less clean 1664 than the SIP INFO method. The SIP SUBSCRIBE/NOTIFY method could be 1665 coerced into service, but the semantics are not a good fit, e.g., the 1666 subscribe/notify mechanism provides one-way communication consisting 1667 of (often multiple) notifications from notifier to subscriber 1668 indicating that certain events in notifier have occurred, whereas 1669 what's needed here is two-way communication of data related to the 1670 emergency dialog. Use of the media plane mechanisms was discounted 1671 because the number of messages needing to be exchanged in a dialog is 1672 normally zero or very few, and the size of the data is likewise very 1673 small. The overhead caused by user plane setup (e.g., to use MSRP as 1674 transport) would be disproportionately large. 1676 Based on the the analyses, the SIP INFO method was chosen to provide 1677 for mid-call data transport. 1679 14.10.3. Info Package Name 1681 The info package name is emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 1683 14.10.4. Info Package Parameters 1685 None 1687 14.10.5. SIP Option-Tags 1689 None 1691 14.10.6. INFO Request Body Parts 1693 The body for an emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD info package is a 1694 multipart (normally multipart/mixed) body containing zero or one 1695 application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD+per part (containing an MSD) 1696 and zero or more application/emergencyCallData.control+xml 1697 (containing a metadata/control object) parts. At least one MSD or 1698 metadata/control body part is expected; the behavior upon receiving 1699 an INFO request with neither is undefined. 1701 The body parts are sent per [RFC6086], and in addition, to align with 1702 with how these body parts are sent in SIP messages other than INFO 1703 requests, each associated body part is referenced by a Call-Info 1704 header field at the top level of the SIP message. The body part has 1705 a Content-Disposition header field set to "By-Reference". 1707 An MSD or metadata/control block is always enclosed in a multipart 1708 body part (even if it would otherwise be the only body part in the 1709 SIP message), since as of the date of this document, the use of 1710 Content-ID as a SIP header field is not defined (while it is defined 1711 for use as a MIME header field). The innermost multipart that 1712 contains only body parts associated with the INFO package has a 1713 Content-Disposition value of Info-Package. 1715 See [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] for more information. 1717 14.10.7. Info Package Usage Restrictions 1719 Usage is limited to vehicle-initiated emergency calls as defined in 1720 [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT]. 1722 14.10.8. Rate of INFO Requests 1724 The SIP INFO request is used within an established emergency call 1725 dialog for the PSAP to request the IVS to send an updated MSD, and 1726 for the IVS to send a requested MSD. Because this is normally done 1727 only on manual request of the PSAP call taker (who suspects some 1728 aspect of the vehicle state has changed), the rate of SIP INFO 1729 requests associated with the emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD info package 1730 is normally quite low (most dialogs are likely to contain zero INFO 1731 requests, while others might carry an occasional request). 1733 14.10.9. Info Package Security Considerations 1735 The MIME media type registrations specified for use with this INFO 1736 package (Section 14.3 and Section 14.4) contain a discussion of the 1737 security and/or privacy considerations specific to that data block. 1738 The "Security Considerations" and "Privacy Considerations" sections 1739 of [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] discuss security and privacy considerations 1740 of the data carried in eCalls. 1742 14.10.10. Implementation Details 1744 See [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] for protocol details. 1746 14.10.11. Examples 1748 See [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] for protocol examples. 1750 15. Contributors 1752 Brian Rosen was a co-author of the original document upon which this 1753 document is based. 1755 16. Acknowledgements 1757 We would like to thank Bob Williams and Ban Al-Bakri for their 1758 feedback and suggestion; Rex Buddenberg, Lena Chaponniere, Alissa 1759 Cooper, Keith Drage, Stephen Edge, Wes George, Allison Mankin, Ivo 1760 Sedlacek, and James Winterbottom for their review and comments; 1761 Robert Sparks and Paul Kyzivat for their help with the SIP 1762 mechanisms; Mark Baker and Ned Freed for their help with the media 1763 subtype registration issue. We would like to thank Michael Montag, 1764 Arnoud van Wijk, Gunnar Hellstrom, and Ulrich Dietz for their help 1765 with the original document upon which this document is based. 1766 Christer Holmberg deserves special mention for his many detailed 1767 reviews. 1769 17. Changes from Previous Versions 1771 17.1. Changes from draft-ietf-19 to draft-ietf-20 1773 o Fixed various nits 1775 17.2. Changes from draft-ietf-18 to draft-ietf-19 1777 o Added additional text to "Rate of Info Requests" 1778 o Added additional text to "Security Considerations" 1779 o Further corrected "content type" to "media type" 1781 17.3. Changes from draft-ietf-17 to draft-ietf-18 1783 o Added reference to 3GPP TS24.229 1784 o Clarified that an INFO request is expected to have at least one 1785 MSD or metadata/control body part 1786 o Fixed minor errors in examples 1787 o Corrected "content type" to "media type" 1788 o Deleted "xsi:schemaLocation" from examples 1790 17.4. Changes from draft-ietf-16 to draft-ietf-17 1792 o Clarify Content-Disposition value in INFO requests 1794 17.5. Changes from draft-ietf-15 to draft-ietf-16 1796 o Various clarifications and simplifications 1797 o Added reference to 3GPP 23.167 1799 17.6. Changes from draft-ietf-14 to draft-ietf-15 1801 o eCall body parts now always sent enclosed in multipart (even if 1802 only body part in SIP message) and hence always have a Content- 1803 Disposition of By-Reference 1804 o Fixed errors in attribute directionality text 1805 o Fixed typos. 1807 17.7. Changes from draft-ietf-13 to draft-ietf-14 1809 o Added text to the IANA Considerations to formalize the 1810 EmergencyCallData media subtree 1811 o Fixed some typos 1813 17.8. Changes from draft-ietf-12 to draft-ietf-13 1815 o Clarifications suggested by Christer 1816 o Corrections to Content-Disposition text and examples as suggested 1817 by Paul Kyzivat 1818 o Clarifications to Content-Disposition text and examples to clarify 1819 that handling=optional is only used in the initial INVITE 1821 17.9. Changes from draft-ietf-11 to draft-ietf-12 1823 o Fixed errors in examples found by Dale 1824 o Removed enclosing sub-section of INFO package registration section 1825 o Added text per Christer and Dale's suggestions that the MSD and 1826 metadata/control blocks are sent in INFO with a Call-Info header 1827 field referencing them 1829 o Deleted Call Routing section (7.1) in favor of a statement that 1830 call routing is outside the scope of the document 1831 o Other text changes per comments received from Christer and Ivo. 1833 17.10. Changes from draft-ietf-09 to draft-ietf-11 1835 o Renamed INFO package to emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 1836 o Changed INFO package to only permit MSD and metadata/control MIME 1837 types 1838 o Moved element back from car-crash but made it 1839 OPTIONAL 1840 o Moved other extension points back from car-crash so that extension 1841 points are in base spec (and also to get XML schema to compile) 1842 o Text changes for clarification. 1844 17.11. Changes from draft-ietf-08 to draft-ietf-09 1846 o Created a new "Data Transport" section that describes how the MSD 1847 and metadata/control blocks are attached, and then referred to 1848 that section rather than repeat the information about the CID and 1849 Call-Info and so forth, which means most references to the 1850 additional-data draft have now been deleted 1851 o Mentioned edge cases where a PSAP response to INVITE isn't 1852 received by the IVS 1853 o Reworded description of which status codes are used when a PSAP 1854 wishes to reject a call but inform the vehicle occupants that it 1855 is aware of the situation to be more definite 1856 o Added examples showing INFO 1857 o Added references for eCall test call requirement 1858 o Described meaning of eCall URNs in Section 8 as well as in IANA 1859 registration 1861 17.12. Changes from draft-ietf-07 to draft-ietf-08 1863 o eCall MSD now encoded as ASN.1 PER, using binary content transfer 1864 encoding 1865 o Added text to point out aspects of call handling and metadata/ 1866 control usage, such as use in rejected calls, and solicited MSDs 1867 o Revised use of INFO to require that when a request for an MSD is 1868 sent in INFO, the MSD sent in response is in its own INFO, not the 1869 response to the requesting INFO 1870 o Added material to INFO package registation to comply with 1871 Section 10 of [RFC6086] 1872 o Moved material not required by 3GPP into 1873 [I-D.ietf-ecrit-car-crash], e.g., some of the eCall metadata/ 1874 control elements, attributes, and values 1875 o Revised test call wording to clarify that specific handling is out 1876 of scope 1878 o Revised wording throughout the document to simplify 1879 o Moved new Section 7.1 to be a subsection of 7 1880 o Moved new Section Section 14.10 to be a main section instead of a 1881 subsection of Section 9 1882 o Revised SIP INFO usage and package registration per advice from 1883 Robert Sparks and Paul Kyzivat 1885 17.13. Changes from draft-ietf-06 to draft-ietf-07 1887 o Fixed typo in Acknowledgements 1889 17.14. Changes from draft-ietf-05 to draft-ietf-06 1891 o Added additional security and privacy clarifications regarding 1892 signed and encrypted data 1893 o Additional security and privacy text 1894 o Deleted informative section on ESINets as unnecessary. 1896 17.15. Changes from draft-ietf-04 to draft-ietf-05 1898 o Reworked the security and privacy considerations material in the 1899 document as a whole and in the MIME registation sections of the 1900 MSD and control objects 1901 o Clarified that the element can appear multiple 1902 times within an element 1903 o Fixed IMS definition 1904 o Added clarifying text for the 'msgid' attribute 1906 17.16. Changes from draft-ietf-03 to draft-ietf-04 1908 o Added Privacy Considerations section 1909 o Reworded most uses of non-normative "may", "should", "must", and 1910 "recommended." 1911 o Fixed nits in examples 1913 17.17. Changes from draft-ietf-02 to draft-ietf-03 1915 o Added request to enable cameras 1916 o Improved examples and XML schema 1917 o Clarifications and wording improvements 1919 17.18. Changes from draft-ietf-01 to draft-ietf-02 1921 o Added clarifying text reinforcing that the data exchange is for 1922 small blocks of data infrequently transmitted 1923 o Clarified that dynamic media is conveyed using SIP re-INVITE to 1924 establish a one-way media stream 1926 o Clarified that the scope is the needs of eCall within the SIP 1927 emergency call environment 1928 o Added informative statement that the document may be suitable for 1929 reuse by other ACN systems 1930 o Clarified that normative language for the control block applies to 1931 both IVS and PSAP 1932 o Removed 'ref', 'supported-mime', and elements 1933 o Minor wording improvements and clarifications 1935 17.19. Changes from draft-ietf-00 to draft-ietf-01 1937 o Added further discussion of test calls 1938 o Added further clarification to the document scope 1939 o Mentioned that multi-region vehicles may need to support other 1940 crash notification specifications in addition to eCall 1941 o Added details of the eCall metadata and control functionality 1942 o Added IANA registration for the MIME media type for the control 1943 object 1944 o Added IANA registries for protocol elements and tokens used in the 1945 control object 1946 o Minor wording improvements and clarifications 1948 17.20. Changes from draft-gellens-03 to draft-ietf-00 1950 o Renamed from draft-gellens- to draft-ietf-. 1951 o Added mention of and reference to ETSI TR "Mobile Standards Group 1952 (MSG); eCall for VoIP" 1953 o Added text to Introduction regarding migration/co-existence being 1954 out of scope 1955 o Added mention in Security Considerations that even if the network- 1956 supplied location is just the cell site, this can be useful as a 1957 sanity check on the IVS-supplied location 1958 o Minor wording improvements and clarifications 1960 17.21. Changes from draft-gellens-02 to -03 1962 o Clarifications and editorial improvements. 1964 17.22. Changes from draft-gellens-01 to -02 1966 o Minor wording improvements 1967 o Removed ".automatic" and ".manual" from 1968 "urn:service:test.sos.ecall" registration and discussion text. 1970 17.23. Changes from draft-gellens-00 to -01 1972 o Now using 'EmergencyCallData' for purpose parameter values and 1973 MIME subtypes, in accordance with changes to [RFC7852] 1974 o Added reference to RFC 6443 1975 o Fixed bug that caused Figure captions to not appear 1977 18. References 1979 18.1. Normative References 1981 [msd] CEN, , "Intelligent transport systems -- eSafety -- eCall 1982 minimum set of data (MSD), EN 15722", April 2015. 1984 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 1985 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 1986 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 1987 . 1989 [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, 1990 DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, 1991 . 1993 [RFC5031] Schulzrinne, H., "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for 1994 Emergency and Other Well-Known Services", RFC 5031, 1995 DOI 10.17487/RFC5031, January 2008, 1996 . 1998 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 1999 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, 2000 DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, 2001 . 2003 [RFC6086] Holmberg, C., Burger, E., and H. Kaplan, "Session 2004 Initiation Protocol (SIP) INFO Method and Package 2005 Framework", RFC 6086, DOI 10.17487/RFC6086, January 2011, 2006 . 2008 [RFC6838] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type 2009 Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13, 2010 RFC 6838, DOI 10.17487/RFC6838, January 2013, 2011 . 2013 [RFC6881] Rosen, B. and J. Polk, "Best Current Practice for 2014 Communications Services in Support of Emergency Calling", 2015 BCP 181, RFC 6881, DOI 10.17487/RFC6881, March 2013, 2016 . 2018 [RFC7303] Thompson, H. and C. Lilley, "XML Media Types", RFC 7303, 2019 DOI 10.17487/RFC7303, July 2014, 2020 . 2022 [RFC7852] Gellens, R., Rosen, B., Tschofenig, H., Marshall, R., and 2023 J. Winterbottom, "Additional Data Related to an Emergency 2024 Call", RFC 7852, DOI 10.17487/RFC7852, July 2016, 2025 . 2027 18.2. Informative references 2029 [CEN] "European Committee for Standardization", 2030 . 2032 [EN_16062] 2033 CEN, , "Intelligent transport systems - eSafety - eCall 2034 High Level Application Requirements (HLAP) Using GSM/UMTS 2035 Circuit Switched Networks, EN 16062", April 2015. 2037 [EN_16072] 2038 CEN, , "Intelligent transport systems - eSafety - Pan- 2039 European eCall operating requirements, EN 16072", April 2040 2015. 2042 [I-D.ietf-ecrit-car-crash] 2043 Gellens, R., Rosen, B., and H. Tschofenig, "Next- 2044 Generation Vehicle-Initiated Emergency Calls", draft-ietf- 2045 ecrit-car-crash-19 (work in progress), November 2016. 2047 [MSG_TR] ETSI, , "ETSI Mobile Standards Group (MSG); eCall for 2048 VoIP", ETSI Technical Report TR 103 140 V1.1.1 (2014-04), 2049 April 2014. 2051 [RFC5012] Schulzrinne, H. and R. Marshall, Ed., "Requirements for 2052 Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies", 2053 RFC 5012, DOI 10.17487/RFC5012, January 2008, 2054 . 2056 [RFC5069] Taylor, T., Ed., Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and M. 2057 Shanmugam, "Security Threats and Requirements for 2058 Emergency Call Marking and Mapping", RFC 5069, 2059 DOI 10.17487/RFC5069, January 2008, 2060 . 2062 [RFC6443] Rosen, B., Schulzrinne, H., Polk, J., and A. Newton, 2063 "Framework for Emergency Calling Using Internet 2064 Multimedia", RFC 6443, DOI 10.17487/RFC6443, December 2065 2011, . 2067 [RFC7090] Schulzrinne, H., Tschofenig, H., Holmberg, C., and M. 2068 Patel, "Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) Callback", 2069 RFC 7090, DOI 10.17487/RFC7090, April 2014, 2070 . 2072 [RFC7378] Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and B. Aboba, Ed., 2073 "Trustworthy Location", RFC 7378, DOI 10.17487/RFC7378, 2074 December 2014, . 2076 [SDO-3GPP] 2077 "3d Generation Partnership Project", 2078 . 2080 [SDO-ETSI] 2081 "European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI)", 2082 . 2084 [TS22.101] 2085 3GPP, , "3GPP TS 22.101: Technical Specification Group 2086 Services and System Aspects; Service aspects; Service 2087 principles". 2089 [TS23.167] 2090 3GPP, , "3GPP TS 23.167: IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) 2091 emergency sessions". 2093 [TS24.229] 2094 3GPP, , "3GPP TS 24.229: IP multimedia call control 2095 protocol based on Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and 2096 Session Description Protocol (SDP); Stage 3". 2098 Authors' Addresses 2100 Randall Gellens 2101 Core Technology Consulting 2103 Email: rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org 2105 Hannes Tschofenig 2106 Individual 2108 Email: Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net 2109 URI: http://www.tschofenig.priv.at