ECRITInternet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. GellensInternet-DraftRequest for Comments: 8147 Core Technology ConsultingIntended status:Category: Standards Track H. TschofenigExpires: August 18, 2017ISSN: 2070-1721 IndividualFebruary 14,May 2017 Next-Generation Pan-European eCalldraft-ietf-ecrit-ecall-27.txtAbstract This document describes how to use IP-based emergency services mechanisms to support the next generation of thepan European in- vehiclePan-European in-vehicle emergency call service defined under the eSafety initiative of the European Commission (generally referred to as "eCall"). eCall is a standardized and mandated system for a special form of emergency calls placed by vehicles, providing real-time communications and an integrated set of related data. This document also registers MIME media types and an Emergency CallAdditionalDataBlockType for the eCall vehicle data and metadata/control data, and an INFO package to enable carrying this data in SIP INFO requests. Although this specification is designed to meet the requirements ofEuropeannext-generationeCall,Pan-European eCall (NG-eCall), it is specified generically such that the technology can bere-usedreused or extended to suit requirements across jurisdictions. Status of This Memo ThisInternet-Draftissubmitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documentsan Internet Standards Track document. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The listIt represents the consensus ofcurrent Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents validthe IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved fora maximumpublication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841. Information about the current status ofsix monthsthis document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may beupdated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documentsobtained atany time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on August 18, 2017.http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8147. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1.Terminology .Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 2.Document ScopeTerminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 3. Introduction. 5 3. Document Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. eCall Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 5. Vehicle Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 6. Data Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. Call Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109 8. Test Calls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1110 9. The Metadata/Control Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1110 9.1. The Control Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1312 9.1.1. The <ack>elementElement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9.1.1.1. Attributes of the <ack>elementElement . . . . . . . . .1413 9.1.1.2. Child Element of the <ack>elementElement . . . . . . . 14 9.1.1.3.Ack Examples . . . . . . . .Example of the <ack> Element . . . . . . . . . . 15 9.1.2. The <capabilities>elementElement . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 9.1.2.1. Child Element of the <capabilities>elementElement . . . 15 9.1.2.2.CapabilitiesExample of the <capabilities> Element . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 1615 9.1.3. The <request>elementElement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9.1.3.1. Attributes of the <request>elementElement . . . . . . .1716 9.1.3.2. Child Element of the <request> Element . . . . . 18 9.1.3.3. Request Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 10. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 12. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 13. XML Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 14. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2829 14.1. The EmergencyCallData Media Subtree . . . . . . . . . .2829 14.2. Service URN Registrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 14.3. MIME Media Type Registration for'application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD'application/EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD . . . . . . .29. 30 14.4. MIME Media Type Registration for'application/emergencyCallData.control+xml'application/EmergencyCallData.Control+xml . . . . . . . 31 14.5. Registration of the'eCall.MSD' entry"eCall.MSD" Entry in the Emergency CallAdditionalData TypesregistryRegistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32. . 33 14.6. Registration of the'control' entry"Control" Entry in the Emergency CallAdditionalData TypesregistryRegistry . . . . . . . . . . .32. . . . . 33 14.7. Registration for urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control . . . . 33 14.8. Registry Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3334 14.8.1. Emergency CallActionActions Registry . . . . . . . . . .. 3334 14.8.2. Emergency Call Action FailureReasonReasons Registry . . . 34 14.9. TheemergencyCallData.eCall.MSDEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFOpackagePackage . . . . . . 35 14.9.1. Overall Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3536 14.9.2. Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 14.9.3.InfoINFO Package Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3637 14.9.4.InfoINFO Package Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3637 14.9.5. SIP Option-Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 14.9.6. INFO Request Body Parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 14.9.7.InfoINFO Package Usage Restrictions . . . . . . . . . . 37 14.9.8. Rate of INFO Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 14.9.9.InfoINFO Package Security Considerations . . . . . . . . 38 14.9.10. Implementation Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 14.9.11. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 15.ContributorsReferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3816. Acknowledgements15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 15.2. Informative references . . . .38 17. Changes from Previous Versions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 17.1. Changes from draft-ietf-19 to draft-ietf-20 . . . . . . 38 17.2. Changes from draft-ietf-18 to draft-ietf-19 . . .. . .39 17.3. Changes from draft-ietf-17 to draft-ietf-18 .. . . . .39 17.4. Changes from draft-ietf-16 to draft-ietf-17 .. . . . . 3917.5. Changes from draft-ietf-15 to draft-ietf-16 . .Acknowledgments . . . .39 17.6. Changes from draft-ietf-14 to draft-ietf-15 .. . . . .39 17.7. Changes from draft-ietf-13 to draft-ietf-14. . . . . .39 17.8. Changes from draft-ietf-12 to draft-ietf-13. . . . . .39 17.9. Changes from draft-ietf-11 to draft-ietf-12. . . . 41 Contributors . .40 17.10. Changes from draft-ietf-09 to draft-ietf-11. . . . . .40 17.11. Changes from draft-ietf-08 to draft-ietf-09. . . . . .40 17.12. Changes from draft-ietf-07 to draft-ietf-08. . . . . .40 17.13. Changes from draft-ietf-06 to draft-ietf-07. . . . . . 4117.14. Changes from draft-ietf-05 to draft-ietf-06 .Authors' Addresses . . . . .41 17.15. Changes from draft-ietf-04 to draft-ietf-05. . . . . .41 17.16. Changes from draft-ietf-03 to draft-ietf-04. . . . . .41 17.17. Changes from draft-ietf-02 to draft-ietf-03. . . . . . 4117.18. Changes from draft-ietf-01 to draft-ietf-02 . . . . . . 42 17.19. Changes1. Introduction Emergency calls made fromdraft-ietf-00vehicles (e.g., in the event of a crash) assist in significantly reducing road deaths and injuries by allowing emergency services todraft-ietf-01 . . . . . . 42 17.20. Changes from draft-gellens-03be aware of the incident, the state (condition) of the vehicle, and the location of the vehicle and todraft-ietf-00 . . . . . 42 17.21. Changes from draft-gellens-02have a voice communications channel with the vehicle occupants. This enables a quick and appropriate response. The European Commission initiative of eCall was conceived in the late 1990s and has evolved to-03 . . . . . . . . . . 42 17.22. Changes from draft-gellens-01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . 43 17.23. Changes from draft-gellens-00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . 43 18. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 18.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 18.2. Informative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 1. Terminology The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document area European Parliament decision requiring the implementation of a compliant in-vehicle system (IVS) in new vehicles and the deployment of eCall in the European Member States in the very near future. Other regions are developing eCall-compatible systems. The Pan-European eCall system is a standardized and mandated mechanism for emergency calls by vehicles, providing a voice channel and transmission of data. eCall establishes procedures for such calls to beinterpreted as described in [RFC2119]. This document re-uses terminology defined in Section 3 of [RFC5012]. Additionally, we useplaced by in-vehicle systems, recognized and processed by thefollowing abbreviations: +--------+----------------------------------------+ | Term | Expansion | +--------+----------------------------------------+ | 3GPP | 3rd Generation Partnership Project | | | | | CEN | European Committee for Standardization | | | | | EENA | European Emergency Number Association | | | | | ESInet | Emergency Services IP network | | | | | IMS | IP Multimedia Subsystem | | | | | IVS | In-Vehicle System | | | | | MNO | Mobile Network Operator | | | | | MSD | Minimum Set of Data | | | | | PSAP |mobile network, and routed to a specialized Public Safety Answering Point| +--------+----------------------------------------+ 2. Document Scope This document is focused on(PSAP) where thesignaling,vehicle dataexchange,is available to assist the call taker in assessing andprotocol needs of next-generation eCall (NG-eCall, also referredresponding toas packet-switchedthe situation. eCall provides a standard set of vehicle, sensor (e.g., crash-related), and location data. An eCall can be either user initiated orall-IP eCall) within the SIP frameworkautomatically triggered. Automatically triggered eCalls indicate a car crash or some other serious incident. Manually triggered eCalls might be reports of witnessed crashes or serious hazards, a request foremergency calls (as described in [RFC6443]medical assistance, etc. PSAPs might apply specific operational handling to manual and[RFC6881]).automatic eCalls. Legacy eCallitselfisspecified bystandardized (by 3GPP(3rd Generation Partnership Project)[SDO-3GPP] andCEN (Europeanthe European Committee forStandardization) and these specifications include far greater scope than is covered here. The eCall service operates over cellular wireless communication, but this document does not address cellular-specific details, nor client domain selection (e.g.,Standardization (CEN) [CEN]) as a 3GPP circuit-switchedversus packet-switched). All such aspects arecall over Global System for Mobile communications (GSM) (2G) or Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) (3G). Flags in thepurview of their respective standards bodies.call setup mark the call as an eCall and further indicate if the call was automatically or manually triggered. Thescope of this documentcall islimitedrouted toeCall operating withinan eCall-capable PSAP, aSIP-based environment (e.g., 3GPP IMS Emergency Calling [TS23.167]). Although this specificationvoice channel isdesigned to meetestablished between therequirements of pan-European next-generation eCall, it is specified generically such thatvehicle and thetechnology can be re-used or extended to suit requirements across jurisdictions (see, e.g., [I-D.ietf-ecrit-car-crash]),PSAP, andextension points are provided to facilitate this. Note that vehicles designed for multiple regions might need to supportan eCalland other Advanced Automatic Crash Notification (AACN) systems (such as described in [I-D.ietf-ecrit-car-crash]), but thisin-band modem isout of scopeused to carry a defined set ofthis document. 3. Introduction Emergency calls made from vehiclesvehicle, sensor (e.g.,in the event of a crash) assist in significantly reducing road deathscrash-related), andinjuries by allowing emergency services to be aware of the incident, the statelocation data (the Minimum Set of Data or MSD) within thevehicle,voice channel. The same in-band mechanism is used for thelocationPSAP to acknowledge successful receipt of thevehicle,MSD and tohave a voice channel withrequest the vehicleoccupants. This enablesto send aquick and appropriate response. The European Commission initiativenew MSD (e.g., to check if the state of or location ofeCall was conceived inthelate 1990s, andvehicle or its occupants hasevolvedchanged). NG-eCall moves from circuit switched toa European Parliament decision requiring the implementation of a compliant in-vehicle system (IVS) in new vehiclesall-IP and carries thedeployment ofvehicle data and eCallin the European Member States insignaling as additional data carried with thevery near future. Other regions are developing eCall-compatible systems. The pan-European eCall system is a standardized and mandated mechanismcall. This document describes how IETF mechanisms for IP-based emergency callsby vehicles, providing a voice channel(including [RFC6443] andtransmission of data. eCall establishes procedures for such calls[RFC7852]) are used tobe placed by in-vehicle systems, recognized and processed byprovide themobile network, and routed to a specialized PSAP where the vehicle data is available to assist the call taker in assessing and responding to the situation. eCall provides a standard set of vehicle, sensor (e.g., crash related), and location data. An eCall can be either user-initiated or automatically triggered. Automatically triggered eCalls indicate a car crash or some other serious incident. Manually triggered eCalls might be reports of witnessed crashes or serious hazards. PSAPs might apply specific operational handling to manual and automatic eCalls. Legacy eCall is standardized (by 3GPP [SDO-3GPP] and CEN [CEN]) as a 3GPP circuit-switched call over GSM (2G) or UMTS (3G). Flags in the call setup mark the call as an eCall, and further indicate if the call was automatically or manually triggered. The call is routed to an eCall-capable PSAP, a voice channel is established between the vehicle and the PSAP, and an eCall in-band modem is used to carry a defined set of vehicle, sensor (e.g., crash related), and location data (the Minimum Set of Data or MSD) within the voice channel. The same in-band mechanism is used for the PSAP to acknowledge successful receipt of the MSD, and to request the vehicle to send a new MSD (e.g., to check if the state of or location of the vehicle or its occupants has changed). NG-eCall moves from circuit switched to all- IP, and carries the vehicle data and eCall signaling as additional data carried with the call. This document describes how IETF mechanisms for IP-based emergency calls (including [RFC6443] and [RFC7852]) are used to provide the signalingsignaling and data exchange of the next generation ofpan-EuropeanPan-European eCall. The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) [SDO-ETSI] has published a Technical Report titled "Mobile Standards Group (MSG); eCall for VoIP" [MSG_TR] that presents findings and recommendations regarding support for eCall in an all-IP environment. The recommendations include the use of 3GPPIMSInternet Multimedia System (IMS) emergency calling with additional elements identifying the call as an eCall and as carrying eCall data andwithmechanisms for carrying the data and eCall signaling. 3GPP IMS emergency services support multimedia, providing the ability to carry voice, text, and video. This capability is referred to within 3GPP as Multimedia Emergency Services (MMES). A transition period will exist during which time the various entities involved in initiating and handling an eCall might supportnext- generation eCall,NG-eCall, legacy eCall, or both. The issues of migration and co-existence during the transition period are outside the scope of this document. This document indicates how to use IP-based emergency services mechanisms to supportnext-generation eCall.NG-eCall. This document also registers MIME media types andanEmergency CallAdditionalDataBlockTypes for the eCall vehicle data (MSD) andmetadata/ controlmetadata/control data, and an INFO package to enable carrying this data in SIP INFO requests. The MSD is carried in the MIME type'application/ emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD'application/ EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD and the metadata/control block is carried in the MIME type'application/emergencyCallData.control+xml'application/EmergencyCallData.Control+xml (both of which are registered in Section 14). An INFO package is defined (in Section 14.9) to enable these MIME types to be carried in SIP INFO requests, per [RFC6086].4. eCall Requirements eCall requirements are specified by CEN in [EN_16072]2. Terminology The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", andby 3GPP"OPTIONAL" in[TS22.101] clauses 10.7 and A.27 and [TS24.229] section 4.7.6. Requirements specific to vehicle datathis document arecontainedto be interpreted as described inEN 15722 [msd]. 5. Vehicle Data Pan-European eCall provides a standardized and mandated set of vehicle related data (including VIN, vehicle type, propulsion type, current and optionally previous location coordinates, and number[RFC2119]. This document reuses terminology defined in Section 3 ofoccupants), known as[RFC5012]. Additionally, we use theMinimum Set of Data (MSD). Thefollowing abbreviations: 3GPP: 3rd Generation Partnership Project CEN: European Committee for Standardization(CEN) has specified this data in EN 15722 [msd], along with both ASN.1 and XML encodings. Both circuit- switched eCall and this document use the ASN.1 PER encoding, which is specified in Annex AEENA: European Emergency Number Association ESInet: Emergency Services IP network IMS: IP Multimedia Subsystem IVS: In-Vehicle System MNO: Mobile Network Operator MSD: Minimum Set ofEN 15722 [msd] (the XML encoding specified in Annex C is not used in this document, per 3GPP [SDO-3GPP]).Data PSAP: Public Safety Answering Point 3. Document Scope This documentregisters the 'application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' MIME media type to enable the MSD to be carried in SIP. As an ASN.1 PER encoded object,is focused on the signaling, datais binaryexchange, andtransported using binary content transfer encoding within SIP messages. This document also adds the 'eCall.MSD' entry to the Emergency Call Additional Data Types registry to enable the MSDprotocol needs of NG-eCall (also referred tobe recognizedassuch in a SIP- basedpacket-switched eCallemergency call. (See [RFC7852] for more information aboutor all-IP eCall) within theregistrySIP framework for emergency calls (as described in [RFC6443] andhow it[RFC6881]). eCall itself isused.) See Section 6 for a discussion of how the MSD vehicle dataspecified by 3GPP and CEN, and these specifications include far greater scope than isconveyed in an NG-eCall. 6. Data Transport [RFC7852] establishes a general mechanism for conveying blocks of data within a SIP emergency call. Thiscovered here. The eCall service operates over cellular wireless communication, but this documentmakes usedoes not address cellular-specific details, nor client domain selection (e.g., circuit-switched versus packet-switched). All such aspects are the purview ofthat mechanism to include vehicle data (the MSD, see Section 5) and/or metadata/control information (see Section 9) within SIP messages. Thistheir respective standards bodies. The scope of this documentalso registers an INFO package (in Section 14.9)is limited toenableeCallrelated data blocksoperating within a SIP-based environment (e.g., 3GPP IMS Emergency Calling [TS23.167]). Although this specification is designed tobe carried in SIP INFO requests (per [RFC6086], new INFO usages requiremeet thedefinitionrequirements ofan INFO package). NotePan-European NG-eCall, it is specified generically such thatif other data sets need to be transmitted in the future,theappropriate signalling mechanismtechnology can be reused or extended to suit requirements across jurisdictions (see, e.g., [RFC8148]), and extension points are provided to facilitate this. Note that vehicles designed forsuch data needsmultiple regions might need tobe evaluated, including factors such as the sizesupport eCall andfrequency of such data. An In-Vehicle System (IVS) transmits an MSD (see Section 5)other Advanced Automatic Crash Notification (AACN) systems (such as described in [RFC8148]), but this is out of scope of this document. 4. eCall Requirements eCall requirements are specified byencoding it perCEN in [EN_16072] and by 3GPP in [TS22.101], Section 10.7 and AnnexA ofA.27, and [TS24.229], Section 4.7.6. Requirements specific to vehicle data are contained in EN 15722[msd],[MSD]. 5. Vehicle Data Pan-European eCall provides a standardized andincluding itmandated set of vehicle-related data (including VIN, vehicle type, propulsion type, current and optionally previous location coordinates, and the number of occupants) known asa MIME body part within a SIP message per [RFC7852]. The body part is identified by its MIME media type ('application/ emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD') intheContent-Type header fieldMinimum Set of Data (MSD). CEN has specified this data in EN 15722 [MSD], along with both ASN.1 and XML encodings. Both circuit-switched eCall and this document use thebody part. The body part is assigned a unique identifierASN.1 PER encoding, which islistedspecified ina Content-ID header fieldAnnex A of EN 15722 [MSD] (the XML encoding specified inthe body part. The SIP messageAnnex C ismarked as containing the MSD by adding (or appending to) a Call-Info header field at the top level of the SIP message. This Call-Info header field contains a CID URL referencing the body part's unique identifier, and a 'purpose' parameter identifying the data as the eCall MSDnot used in this document, per 3GPP [SDO-3GPP]). This document registers theEmergency Call Additional Data Types registry entry;application/EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD MIME media type to enable the'purpose' parameter's value is 'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD'. Per [RFC6086], anMSDisto be carried ina SIP INFO request bySIP. As an ASN.1 PER-encoded object, the data is binary and transported using binary content transfer encoding within SIP messages. This document also adds "eCall.MSD" to theINFO package defined"Emergency Call Data Types" registry to enable the MSD to be recognized as such in a SIP-based eCall emergency call. (See [RFC7852] for more information about the registry and how it is used.) See Section14.9. A PSAP or IVS transmits6 for a discussion of how the MSD vehicle data is conveyed in an NG-eCall. 6. Data Transport [RFC7852] establishes a general mechanism for conveying blocks of data within a SIP emergency call. This document makes use of that mechanism to include vehicle data (the MSD; see Section 5) and metadata/controlobjectinformation (see Section 9) within SIP messages. This document also registers an INFO package (in Section 14.9) to enable eCall-related data blocks to be carried in SIP INFO requests (per [RFC6086], new INFO usages require the definition of an INFO package). Note that if other data sets need to be transmitted in the future, the appropriate signaling mechanism for such data needs to be evaluated, including factors such as the size and frequency of such data. An IVS transmits an MSD (see Section 5) by encoding it perthe description in this document,Annex A of EN 15722 [MSD] and including itwithin a SIP messageas a MIME body part within a SIP message per [RFC7852]. The body part is identified by its MIME media type('application/ emergencyCallData.control+xml')(application/EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD) in the Content-Type header field of the body part. The body part is assigned a unique identifierwhichthat is listed in a Content-ID header field in the body part. The SIP message is marked as containing themetadata/control objectMSD by adding (or appending to) a Call-Info header field at the top level of the SIP message. This Call-Info header field contains aCIDContent Identifier (CID) URL referencing the body part's uniqueidentifier,identifier and a'purpose'"purpose" parameter identifying the data asanthe eCallmetadata/control blockMSD per theEmergencyentry in the "Emergency CallAdditionalDataTypes registry entry;Types" registry; the'purpose'"purpose" parameter's value is'emergencyCallData.control'."EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD". Per [RFC6086],a metadata/control objectan MSD is carried in a SIP INFO request by using the INFO package defined in Section 14.9.An MSDA PSAP or IVS transmits a metadata/controlblock is always enclosed in a multipart body part (even ifobject (see Section 9) by encoding it per the description in this document and including it within a SIP message as a MIME body part per [RFC7852]. The body part is identified by its MIME media type (application/ EmergencyCallData.Control+xml) in the Content-Type header field of the body part. The body part is assigned a unique identifier, which is listed in a Content-ID header field in the body part. The SIP message is marked as containing the metadata/control object by adding (or appending to) a Call-Info header field at the top level of the SIP message. This Call-Info header field contains a CID URL referencing the body part's unique identifier and a "purpose" parameter identifying the data as an eCall metadata/control block per the entry in the "Emergency Call Data Types" registry; the "purpose" parameter's value is "EmergencyCallData.Control". Per [RFC6086], a metadata/control object is carried in a SIP INFO request by using the INFO package defined in Section 14.9. An MSD or a metadata/control block is always enclosed in a multipart body part (even if it would otherwise be the only body part in the SIP message). A body part containing an MSD or metadata/control object has a Content-Disposition header field value containing "By-Reference". AnIn-Vehicle System (IVS)IVS initiating an NG-eCall includes an MSD as a body part within the initialINVITE,INVITE and optionally also includes a metadata/control object informing the PSAP of its capabilities as another body part. The MSD body part (and metadata/control andPIDF- LOPresence Information Data Format Location Object (PIDF-LO) bodypartsparts, if included) have a Content-Disposition header field with the value "By-Reference; handling=optional". Specifying "handling=optional" prevents the SIP INVITE request from being rejected if it is processed by a legacy element (e.g., a gateway between SIP and circuit-switched environments) that does not understand the MSD (or metadata/control object or PIDF-LO). The PSAP creates a metadata/control object acknowledging receipt of the MSD and includes it as a body part within the SIP final response to the SIP INVITE request per [RFC7852]. A metadata/control object is not included in provisional (e.g., 180) responses. A PSAP is able to reject a call while indicating that it is aware of the situation by including a metadata/control object acknowledging the MSD and containing "received=true" within a final response using SIP response code 600 (Busy Everywhere), 486 (Busy Here), or 603 (Decline), per [RFC7852]. If the IVS receives an acknowledgment for an MSD containing "received=false", this indicates that the PSAP was unable to properly decode or process the MSD. The IVS action is not defined (e.g., it might only log an error). Since the PSAP is able to request an updated MSD during the call, if an initial MSD is unsatisfactory in any way, the PSAP can choose to request another one. A PSAP can request that the vehicle send an updated MSD during a call (e.g., upon manual request of the PSAP call taker who suspects the vehicle state may havechanged.)changed). To do so, the PSAP creates a metadata/control object requesting an MSD and includes it within a SIP INFO request sent within the dialog. The IVS then includes an updated MSD within a SIP INFO request and sends it within the dialog. If the IVS is unable to send an MSD, it instead sends a metadata/ control object acknowledging therequestrequest, containing an <actionResult> element withthe 'success'a "success" parameter set to'false'"false" and a'reason'"reason" parameter (and optionally a'details'"details" parameter) indicating why the request could not be accomplished. Per [RFC6086], metadata/control objects and MSDs are sent using the INFO package defined in Section 14.9. In addition, to align with how an MSD or metadata/control block is transmitted in a SIP message other than an INFO request, a Call-Info header field is included in the SIP INFO request to reference the MSD or metadata/control block per [RFC7852]. See Section 14.9 for information about the use of SIP INFO requests to carry data within an eCall. The IVS is not expected to send an unsolicited MSD after the initial INVITE. This document does not mandate support for the data blocks defined in [RFC7852]. 7. Call Setup In a circuit-switched eCall, the IVS places a special form of a 112 emergencycallcall, which carries an eCall flag (indicating that the call is an eCall and also if the call was manually or automatically triggered); the mobile network operator (MNO) recognizes the eCall flag and routes the call to an eCall-capablePSAP;PSAP, and vehicle data is transmitted to the PSAP via the eCall in-band modem (in the voice channel).///----\\\///-----\\\ 112 voice call with eCall flag +------+ ||| IVS |||---------------------------------------->+ PSAP |\\\----///\\\-----/// vehicle data via eCall in-band modem +------+ Figure 1:circuit-switchedCircuit-Switched eCall For NG-eCall, the IVS establishes an emergency call using a Request- URI indicating a manual or automatic eCall; the MNO (or ESInet) recognizes the eCall URN and routes the call to anNG-eCall capableNG-eCall-capable PSAP; and the PSAP interprets the vehicle data sent with the call and makes it available to the call taker.///----\\\///-----\\\ IMS emergency call with eCall URN +------+ ||| IVS----------------------------------------->+|||---------------------------------------->+ PSAP |\\\----///\\\-----/// vehicle data included in call setup +------+ Figure 2: NG-eCall See Section 6 for information on how the MSD is transported within an NG-eCall. This document adds new service URN children within the "sos" subservice. These URNs provide the mechanism by which an eCall isidentified,identified and differentiate between manually and automatically triggered eCalls (which might be subject to different treatment, depending on policy). The two service URNs are: urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic and urn:service:sos.ecall.manual, whichrequestsrequest resources associated with an emergency call placed by an in-vehicle system, carrying a standardized set of data related to the vehicle and incident. These are registered in Section14.214.2. Call routing is outside the scope of this document. 8. Test Calls eCall requires the ability to place test calls (see[TS22.101][TS22.101], clause 10.7 and[EN_16062][EN_16062], clause 7.2.2). These are calls that are recognized and treated to some extent as eCalls but are not given emergency call treatment and are not handled by call takers. The specific handling of test eCalls isnot itself standardized;outside the scope of this document; typically, the test call facility allows the IVS or user to verify that an eCall can be successfully established with voice communication. The IVS might also be able to verify that the MSD was successfully received. A service URN starting with "test." indicates a test call. For eCall, "urn:service:test.sos.ecall" indicates such a test feature.This functionalityThe "test" service URN is defined in [RFC6881]. This document specifies "urn:service:test.sos.ecall" for eCall test calls. This is registered in Section14.214.2. Thecircuit switchedcircuit-switched eCall test call facility is a non-emergencynumbernumber, so it does not get treated as an emergency call. For NG-eCall, MNOs, emergency authorities, and PSAPs can determine how to treat a vehicle call requesting the "test" service URN so that the desired functionality is tested, but this is outside the scope of this document. 9. The Metadata/Control Object eCall requires the ability for the PSAP to acknowledge successful receipt of an MSD sent by theIVS,IVS and for the PSAP to request that the IVS send an MSD (e.g., the call taker can initiate a request for a new MSD to see if there have been changes in the vehicle's state,e.g.,such as location, direction, or number of fastenedseatbelts).seat belts). This document defines a block of metadata/control data as an XML structure containing elements used for eCall and other related emergency call systems and extension points. (This metadata/control block is in effect a high-level protocol between the PSAP and IVS.)WhenThis document registers thePSAP sends a metadata/control block in responseapplication/EmergencyCallData.Control+xml MIME media type todata sent byenable theIVSmetadata/control data to be carried inaSIP. This document also adds "Control" to the "Emergency Call Data Types" registry to enable the metadata/control block to be recognized as such in a SIP-based eCall emergency call. (See [RFC7852] for more information about the registry and how it is used.) See Section 6 for a discussion of how the metadata/control data is conveyed in an NG-eCall. When the PSAP sends a metadata/control block in response to data sent by the IVS in a SIP request other than INFO (e.g., the MSD in the initial INVITE), the metadata/control block is sent in the SIP response to that request (e.g., the response to the INVITE request). When the PSAP sends a control block in other circumstances (e.g.,mid-call),mid call), the control block is transmitted from the PSAP to the IVS in a SIP INFO request within the established dialog. The IVS sends the requested data (the MSD) in a new SIP INFO request (per [RFC6086]). This mechanism flexibly allows the PSAP to sendeCall- specificeCall-specific data to the IVS and the IVS to respond. SIP INFO requests are sent using an appropriateSIPINFOPackage.package. See Section 6 for more information on sending a metadata/control block within a SIP message. See Section 14.9 for information about the use of SIP INFO requests to carry data within an eCall. When the IVS includes an unsolicited MSD in a SIP request (e.g., the initial INVITE), the PSAP sends a metadata/control block indicating successful/unsuccessful receipt of the MSD in the SIP response to the request. This also informs the IVS that an NG-eCall is in operation. If the IVS receives a SIP final response without the metadata/control block, it indicates that the SIP dialog is not an NG-eCall (e.g., some part of the call is being handled as a legacy call). When the IVS sends a solicited MSD (e.g., in a SIP INFO request sent following receipt of a SIP INFO request containing a metadata/control block requesting an MSD), the PSAP does not send a metadata/control block indicating successful or unsuccessful receipt of the MSD. (Normal SIP retransmission handles non-receipt of requested data; note that, per [RFC6086], a 200 OK response to a SIP INFO request indicates only that the receiver has successfully received and accepted the SIP INFO request, and it says nothing about the acceptability of the payload.) If the IVS receives a request to send an MSD but it is unable to do so for any reason, the IVS instead sends a metadata/control object acknowledging therequest andrequest, containing"success=false" and "reason"an <actionResult> element with a "succes" parameter set toan appropriate code."false" and a "reason" parameter (and optionally a "details" parameter) indicating why the request could not be accomplished. This provides flexibility to handle various circumstances. For example, if a PSAP is unable to accept an eCall (e.g., due to overload or too many calls from the same location), it can reject the INVITE. Since a metadata/control object is also included in the SIP response that rejects the call, the IVS knows if the PSAP received theMSD,MSD and can inform the vehicle occupants that the PSAP successfully received the vehicle location and information but can't talk to the occupants at that time. Especially for SIP response codes that indicate an inability to conduct a call (as opposed to a technical inability to process the request), the IVS can also determine that the call was successful on a technical level (e.g., not helpful to retry ascircuit-switched).circuit switched). (Note that there could be edge cases where the PSAP response is not received by the IVS, e.g., if an intermediary sends a CANCEL, and an error response is forwarded towards the IVS before the error response from the PSAP is received, the response will be dropped, but these are unlikely to occur here.) The metadata/control block is carried in the MIME type'application/ emergencyCallData.control+xml'.application/ EmergencyCallData.Control+xml. The metadata/control block is designed for use withpan-EuropeanPan-European eCall and also eCall-like systems (i.e., in other regions), and it has extension points. Note that eCall-like systems might define their own vehicle datablocks,blocks andsomight need to register a new INFO package to accommodate the new data MIME media type and the metadata/ control object. 9.1. The Control Block The control block is an XML data structure allowing for acknowledgments, requests, and capabilities information. It is carried in a body part with a specific MIME media type. Three elements are defined for use within a control block: ack Acknowledges receipt of data or a request. capabilities Used in a control block sent from the IVS to the PSAP (e.g., in the initial INVITE) to inform the PSAP of the vehicle capabilities. Child elements contain all actions and data types supported by the vehicle. It is OPTIONAL for the IVS to send this block. Omitting the block indicates that the IVS supports only the mandatory functionality defined in this document. request Used in a control block sent by the PSAP to theIVS,IVS to request the vehicle to perform an action. The <ack> element indicates the object being acknowledged and reports success or failure. The <request> element contains attributes to indicate the request and to supply related information. The'action'"action" attribute is mandatory and indicates the specific action. An IANA registry is created in Section 14.8.1 to contain the allowed values. The <capabilities> element has child <request> elements to indicate the actions supported by the IVS. 9.1.1. The <ack>elementElement The <ack> element acknowledges receipt of an eCall data object or request. An <ack> element references the Content-ID of the object being acknowledged. The PSAP MUST send an <ack> element acknowledging receipt of an unsolicited MSD (e.g., sent by the IVS in the INVITE); this <ack> element indicates if the PSAP considers the MSD successfully received or not. An <ack> element is not sent for a <capabilities> element.The <ack> element has the following attributes:9.1.1.1. Attributes of the <ack>elementElement The <ack> element has the following attributes: Name: ref Usage: Mandatory Type: anyURI Direction: Sent in either direction Description: References the Content-ID of the body part being acknowledged. Example: <ack received="true" ref="1234567890@atlanta.example.com"/> Name: received Usage: Conditional: mandatory in an <ack> element sent by a PSAP Type:Booleanboolean Direction: In this document, sent from the PSAP to the IVS Description: Indicates if the referenced object was considered successfully received or not. Example: <ack received="true" ref="1234567890@atlanta.example.com"/> 9.1.1.2. Child Element of the <ack>elementElement For extensibility, the <ack> element has the following child element: Name: actionResult Usage: Optional Direction: Sent from the IVS to the PSAP Description: An <actionResult> element indicates the result of an action (other than a successfully executed'send-data'"send-data" action). The <ack> element contains an <actionResult> element for each <request> element that is not a successfully executed'send-data'"send-data" action. The <actionResult> element has the following attributes: Name: action Usage: Mandatory Type: token Description: Contains the value of the'action'"action" attribute of the <request> element Name: success Usage: Mandatory Type:Booleanboolean Description: Indicates if the action was successfully accomplished Name: reason Usage: Conditional Type: token Description: Used when'success'"success" is "false", this attribute contains a reason code for a failure. A registry for reason codes is defined in Section 14.8.2. The initial values are: damaged (required components are damaged), data-unsupported (the data item referenced in a'send-data'"send-data" request is not supported), security-failure (the authenticity of the request or the authority of the requestor could not be verified), unable (a generic error for use when no other code is appropriate), and unsupported (the'action'"action" value is not supported). Name: details Usage: optional Type: string Description: Contains further explanation of the circumstances of a success or failure. The contents areimplementation-specificimplementation specific andhuman-readable.human readable. This is intended for internal use and troubleshooting, not for display to vehicle occupants. 9.1.1.3.Ack ExamplesExample of the <ack> Element <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><emergencyCallData.control<EmergencyCallData.Control xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"> <ack received="true" ref="1234567890@atlanta.example.com"/></emergencyCallData.control></EmergencyCallData.Control> Figure 3:Ack<ack> Example from PSAP to IVS 9.1.2. The <capabilities>elementElement The <capabilities> element is transmitted by the IVS to indicate its capabilities to thePSAP its capabilities.PSAP. No attributes for this element are currently defined.The followingThere is one childelements are defined:element defined. 9.1.2.1. Child Element of the <capabilities>elementElement The <capabilities> element has the following child element: Name: request Usage: Mandatory Description: The <capabilities> element contains a <request> child element per action supported by the vehicle. Example: <capabilities> <request action="send-data" supported-values="eCall.MSD" /> </capabilities> It is OPTIONAL for the IVS to support the <capabilities> element. If the IVS does not send a <capabilities> element, this indicates that the only <request> action supported by the IVS is'send-data'"send-data" with'datatype'"datatype" set to'eCall.MSD'."eCall.MSD". 9.1.2.2.CapabilitiesExample of the <capabilities> Element <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <EmergencyCallData.Control xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control"> <capabilities> <request action="send-data" supported-values="eCall.MSD"/> </capabilities> </EmergencyCallData.Control> Figure 4:Capabilities<capabilities> Element Example 9.1.3. The <request>elementElement A <request> element appears one or more times on its own or as a child of a <capabilities> element. It allows the PSAP to request that the IVS perform an action. The only action that MUST be supported is to send an MSD. Thefollowingattributes and child elements aredefined:defined as follows. 9.1.3.1. Attributes of the <request>elementElement The <request> element has the following attributes: Name: action Usage: Mandatory Type: token Direction: Sent in either direction Description: Identifies the action that the vehicle is requested to perform (in a <request> element within a <capabilities>element,element; indicates an action that the vehicle is capable of performing). An IANA registry is established in Section 14.8.1 to contain the allowed values. Example: action="send-data" Name: int-id Usage: Conditional Type:intunsignedInt Direction: Sent in either direction Description: Defined for extensibility. Documents that make use of it are expected to explain when it is required and how it is used. Example: int-id="3" Name: persistence Usage: Optional Type:xs:durationduration Direction: Sent in either direction Description: Defined for extensibility. Specifies how long to carry on the specified action. If absent, the default is for the duration of the call. Example: persistence="PT1H" Name: datatype Usage: Conditional Type: token Direction: Sent in either direction Description: Mandatory with a "send-data" action within a <request> element that is not within a <capabilities> element. Specifies the data block that the IVS is requested to transmit, using the same identifier as in the'purpose'"purpose" attribute set in a Call-Info header field to point to the data block. Permitted values are contained inthe 'EmergencyIANA's "Emergency Call DataTypes' IANATypes" registry established in [RFC7852]. Only the "eCall.MSD" value is mandatory to support. Example: datatype="eCall.MSD" Name: supported-values Usage: Conditional Type: string Direction: Sent from the IVS to the PSAP Description: Defined for extensibility. Used in a <request> element that is a child of a <capability> element, this attribute lists all supported values of the action type. Permitted values depend on the action value. Multiple values are separated with a semicolon. White space is ignored. Documents that make use of it are expected to explain when it is required, the permitted values, and how it is used. Name: requested-state Usage: Conditional Type: token Direction: Sent from the PSAP to the IVS Description: Defined for extension. Indicates the requested state of an element associated with the request type. Permitted values depend on the request type. Documents that make use of it are expected to explain when it is required, the permitted values, and how it is used. Name: element-id Usage: Conditional Type: token Direction: Sent from the PSAP to the IVS Description: Defined for extension. Identifies the element to be acted on. Permitted values depend on the request type. Documents that make use of it are expected to explain when it is required, the permitted values, and how it is used. 9.1.3.2. Child Element of the <request> Element For extensibility, the <request> element has the following child element: Name: text Usage: Optional Type: string Direction: Sent from the PSAP to the IVS Description: Defined for extension. 9.1.3.3. Request Example <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><emergencyCallData.control<EmergencyCallData.Control xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control"> <request action="send-data" datatype="eCall.MSD"/></emergencyCallData.control></EmergencyCallData.Control> Figure 5:Request<request> Element Example 10. Examples Figure 6 illustrates an eCall. The call uses the request URI'urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic'urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic service URN and is recognized as an eCall, and further as one that was invoked automatically by the IVS due to a crash or other serious incident. In this example, the originating network routes the call to anESInetESInet, which routes the call to the appropriateNG-eCall capableNG-eCall-capable PSAP. The emergency call is received by the ESInet's Emergency Services Routing Proxy (ESRP), as the entry point into the ESInet. The ESRP routes the call to a PSAP, where it is received by a call taker. In deployments where there is no ESInet, the originating network routes the call directly to the appropriateNG-eCall capableNG-eCall-capable PSAP, an illustration of which would be identical to the one below except without an ESInet or ESRP.+------------+ +---------------------------------------++-----------+ +----------------------------------------+ | | | +-------+ | | | | | PSAP2 | | | | | +-------+ | | | | | | | | +------++-------++----------------------+ | Vehicle-->||--+->||--+-->| ESRP|---->||-->| PSAP1|--> Call-Taker--> Call Taker | | | | | +------++-------++----------------------+ | | | | | | | | +-------+ | | | | | PSAP3 | || Originating||Originating| | +-------+ | | Mobile | | | | Network | | ESInet |+------------+ +---------------------------------------++-----------+ +----------------------------------------+ Figure 6: Example of NG-eCall Message Flow Figure 7 illustrates an eCall call flow with a mid-call PSAP request for an updated MSD. The call flow shows the IVS initiating an emergency call, including the MSD in the INVITE. The PSAP includes in the 200 OK response a metadata/control object acknowledging receipt of the MSD. During the call, the PSAP sends a request for an MSD in an INFO request. The IVS sends the requested MSD in a new INFO request. IVS PSAP |(1) INVITE (eCall MSD) | |------------------------------------------->| | | |(2) 200 OK (eCall metadata [ack MSD]) | |<-------------------------------------------| | | |(3) start media stream(s) | |............................................| | | |(4) INFO (eCall metadata [request MSD]) | |<-------------------------------------------| | | |(5) 200 OK | |------------------------------------------->| | | |(6) INFO (eCall MSD) | |------------------------------------------->| | | |(7) 200 OK | |<-------------------------------------------| | | |(8) BYE | |<-------------------------------------------| | | |(9) end media streams | |............................................| | | |(10) 200 OK | |------------------------------------------->| Figure 7: NG-eCall Call Flow IllustrationThe example, shown inFigure8,8 illustrates a SIP eCall INVITE request containing an MSD. For simplicity, the example does not show all SIP headers, nor theSDPSession Description Protocol (SDP) contents, nor does it show any additional data blocks added by the IVS or the originating mobile network. Because the MSD is encoded in ASN.1 PER, which is a binary encoding, its contents cannot be included in a text document. INVITE urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic SIP/2.0 To: urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic From: <sip:+13145551111@example.com>;tag=9fxced76sl Call-ID: 3848276298220188511@atlanta.example.com Geolocation: <cid:target123@example.com> Geolocation-Routing: no Call-Info: <cid:1234567890@atlanta.example.com>;purpose=emergencyCallData.eCall.MSDpurpose=EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD Accept: application/sdp, application/pidf+xml,application/emergencyCallData.control+xmlapplication/EmergencyCallData.Control+xml CSeq: 31862 INVITE Recv-Info:emergencyCallData.eCall.MSDEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD Allow: INVITE, ACK, PRACK, INFO, OPTIONS, CANCEL, REFER, BYE, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, UPDATE Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundary1 Content-Length: ... --boundary1 Content-Type: application/sdp ...Session Description Protocol (SDP) goes here... --boundary1 Content-Type: application/pidf+xml Content-ID: <target123@example.com> Content-Disposition: by-reference;handling=optional ...PIDF-LO goesin herehere... --boundary1 Content-Type:application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSDapplication/EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD Content-ID: <1234567890@atlanta.example.com> Content-Disposition: by-reference;handling=optional ...MSD in ASN.1 PER encoding goes here... --boundary1-- Figure 8: SIP NG-eCall INVITE Continuing the example, Figure 9 illustrates a SIP 200 OK response to the INVITE request of Figure 8, containing acontrolmetadata/control block acknowledging successful receipt of the eCall MSD. (For simplicity, the example does not show all SIP headers.) SIP/2.0 200 OK To: urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic;tag=8gydfe65t0 From: <sip:+13145551111@example.com>;tag=9fxced76sl Call-ID: 3848276298220188511@atlanta.example.com Call-Info: <cid:2345678901@atlanta.example.com>;purpose=emergencyCallData.controlpurpose=EmergencyCallData.Control Accept: application/sdp, application/pidf+xml,application/emergencyCallData.control+xml, application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSDapplication/EmergencyCallData.Control+xml, application/EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD CSeq: 31862 INVITE Recv-Info:emergencyCallData.eCall.MSDEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD Allow: INVITE, ACK, PRACK, INFO, OPTIONS, CANCEL, REFER, BYE, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, UPDATE Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundaryX Content-Length: ... --boundaryX Content-Type: application/sdp ...Session Description Protocol (SDP) goes here... --boundaryX Content-Type:application/emergencyCallData.control+xmlapplication/EmergencyCallData.Control+xml Content-ID: <2345678901@atlanta.example.com> Content-Disposition: by-reference <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><emergencyCallData.control<EmergencyCallData.Control xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control"> <ack received="true" ref="1234567890@atlanta.example.com"/></emergencyCallData.control></EmergencyCallData.Control> --boundaryX-- Figure 9: 200 OKresponseResponse to INVITE Figure 10 illustrates a SIP INFO request containing a metadata/ control block requesting an eCall MSD. (For simplicity, the example does not show all SIP headers.) INFO sip:+13145551111@example.com SIP/2.0 To: <sip:+13145551111@example.com>;tag=9fxced76sl From: Exemplar PSAP <urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic>;tag=8gydfe65t0 Call-ID: 3848276298220188511@atlanta.example.com Call-Info: <cid:3456789012@atlanta.example.com>;purpose=emergencyCallData.controlpurpose=EmergencyCallData.Control CSeq: 41862 INFO Info-Package:emergencyCallData.eCall.MSDEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD Allow: INVITE, ACK, PRACK, INFO, OPTIONS, CANCEL, REFER, BYE, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, UPDATE Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundaryZZZ Content-Disposition: Info-Package Content-Length: ... --boundaryZZZ Content-Disposition: by-reference Content-Type:application/emergencyCallData.control+xmlapplication/EmergencyCallData.Control+xml Content-ID: <3456789012@atlanta.example.com> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><emergencyCallData.control<EmergencyCallData.Control xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control"> <request action="send-data" datatype="eCall.MSD"/></emergencyCallData.control></EmergencyCallData.Control> --boundaryZZZ-- Figure 10: INFOrequestingRequesting MSD Figure 11 illustrates a SIP INFO request containing an MSD. For simplicity, the example does not show all SIP headers. Because the MSD is encoded in ASN.1 PER, which is a binary encoding, its contents cannot be included in a text document. INFO urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic SIP/2.0 To: urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic;tag=8gydfe65t0 From: <sip:+13145551111@example.com>;tag=9fxced76sl Call-ID: 3848276298220188511@atlanta.example.com Call-Info: <cid:4567890123@atlanta.example.com>;purpose=emergencyCallData.eCall.MSDpurpose=EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD CSeq: 51862 INFO Info-Package:emergencyCallData.eCall.MSDEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD Allow: INVITE, ACK, PRACK, INFO, OPTIONS, CANCEL, REFER, BYE, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, UPDATE Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=boundaryLine Content-Disposition: Info-Package Content-Length: ... --boundaryLine Content-Type:application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSDapplication/EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD Content-ID: <4567890123@atlanta.example.com> Content-Disposition: by-reference ...MSD in ASN.1 PER encoding goes here... --boundaryLine-- Figure 11: INFOcontainingContaining MSD 11. Security Considerations The security considerations described in [RFC5069] (on marking and routing emergency calls) apply here. In addition to any network-provided location (which might be determined solely by thenetwork,network or in cooperation with or possibly entirely by the originating device), an eCall carries an IVS-supplied location within the MSD. This is likely to be useful to the PSAP, especially when no network-provided location is included, or when the two locations are independently determined. Even in situations where the network-supplied location is limited to the cell site, this can be useful as a sanity check on the device-supplied location contained in the MSD. The document [RFC7378] discusses trust issues regarding location provided by or determined in cooperation with end devices. Security considerations specific to the mechanism by which the PSAP sends acknowledgments and requests to the vehicle are discussed in the "Security Considerations" block of Section 14.4. Note that an attacker that has access to and is capable of generating a response to the initial INVITE request could generate a 600 (Busy Everywhere), 486 (Busy Here), or 603 (Decline) response that includes a metadata/ control object containing a reference to the MSD in the initial INVITE and a "received=true" field, which could result in the IVS perceiving the PSAP to be overloaded and hence not attempting to reinitiate the call. The risk can be mitigated as discussed in the "Security Considerations" block of Section 14.4. Data received from external sources inherently carries implementation risks. For example, depending on the platform, buffer overflows can introduce remote code execution vulnerabilities, null characters can corrupt strings, numeric values used for internal calculations can result in underflow/overflow errors, malformed XML objects can expose parsing bugs, etc. Implementations need to be cognizant of the potential risks, observe best practices (which might include sufficiently capable static code analysis, fuzz testing, component isolation, avoiding use of unsafe coding techniques, third-party attack tests, signed software, over-the-air updates, etc.), and have multiple levels of protection. Implementors need to be aware that, potentially, the data objects described here and elsewhere (including the MSD and metadata/control objects) might be malformed,mightcontain unexpected characters, have excessively long attributevalues,values and elements, etc. The security considerations discussed in [RFC7852] apply here (see especially the discussion ofTLS,Transport Layer Security (TLS), TLS versions, cipher suites, and PKI). When vehicle data or control/metadata is contained in a signed or encrypted body part, the enclosing multipart (e.g., multipart/signed or multipart/encrypted) has the same Content-ID as the enclosed data part. This allows an entity to identify and access the data blocks it is interested in without having to dive deeply into the message structure or decrypt parts it is not interested in. (The'purpose'"purpose" parameter in a Call-Info header field identifies the data and contains a CID URL pointing to the data block in the body, which has a matching Content-ID body part headerfield).field.) 12. Privacy Considerations The privacy considerations discussed in [RFC7852] apply here. The MSD carries some identifying and personal information (mostly about the vehicle and less about the owner), as well as location information,andso it needs to be protected against unauthorized disclosure. Local regulations may impose additional privacy protection requirements. Privacy considerations specific to the data structure containing vehicle information are discussed in the "Security Considerations" block of Section 14.3. Privacy considerations specific to the mechanism by which the PSAP sends acknowledgments and requests to the vehicle are discussed in the "Security Considerations" block of Section 14.4. 13. XML Schema This section defines an XML schema for the control block. The text description of the control block in Section 9.1 is normative and supersedes any conflicting aspect of this schema. <?xml version="1.0"?> <xs:schema targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:pi="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified"> <xs:import namespace="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace"/> <xs:elementname="EmergencyCallData.control"name="EmergencyCallData.Control" type="pi:controlType"/> <xs:complexType name="controlType"> <xs:complexContent> <xs:restriction base="xs:anyType"> <xs:choice> <xs:element name="capabilities" type="pi:capabilitiesType"/> <xs:element name="request" type="pi:requestType"/> <xs:element name="ack" type="pi:ackType"/> <xs:any namespace="##any" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </xs:choice> <xs:anyAttribute/> </xs:restriction> </xs:complexContent> </xs:complexType> <xs:complexType name="ackType"> <xs:complexContent> <xs:restriction base="xs:anyType"> <xs:sequence minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded"> <xs:element name="actionResult" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"> <xs:complexType> <xs:attribute name="action" type="xs:token" use="required"/> <xs:attribute name="success" type="xs:boolean" use="required"/> <xs:attribute name="reason" type="xs:token"> <xs:annotation> <xs:documentation> conditionally mandatory when @success="false" to indicate reason code for a failure </xs:documentation> </xs:annotation> </xs:attribute> <xs:attribute name="details" type="xs:string"/> <xs:anyAttribute processContents="skip"/> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> <xs:any namespace="##any" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </xs:sequence> <xs:attribute name="ref" type="xs:anyURI" use="required"/> <xs:attribute name="received" type="xs:boolean"/> <xs:anyAttribute/> </xs:restriction> </xs:complexContent> </xs:complexType> <xs:complexType name="capabilitiesType"> <xs:complexContent> <xs:restriction base="xs:anyType"> <xs:sequence minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded"> <xs:element name="request" type="pi:requestType" minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <xs:any namespace="##any" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </xs:sequence> <xs:anyAttribute/> </xs:restriction> </xs:complexContent> </xs:complexType> <xs:complexType name="requestType"> <xs:complexContent> <xs:restriction base="xs:anyType"> <xs:choice minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded"> <xs:element name="text" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"> <xs:complexType> <xs:simpleContent> <xs:extension base="xs:string"> <xs:anyAttribute namespace="##any" processContents="skip"/> </xs:extension> </xs:simpleContent> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> <xs:any namespace="##any" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </xs:choice> <xs:attribute name="action" type="xs:token" use="required"/> <xs:attribute name="int-id" type="xs:unsignedInt"/> <xs:attribute name="persistence" type="xs:duration"/> <xs:attribute name="datatype" type="xs:token"/> <xs:attribute name="supported-values" type="xs:string"/> <xs:attribute name="element-id" type="xs:token"/> <xs:attribute name="requested-state" type="xs:token"/> <xs:anyAttribute/> </xs:restriction> </xs:complexContent> </xs:complexType> </xs:schema> Figure 12: ControlBlock Schema 14. IANA Considerations 14.1. The EmergencyCallData Media Subtree This document establishes the "EmergencyCallData" media (MIME) subtype tree, a new media subtree rooted at "application/ EmergencyCallData". This subtree is used only for content associated with emergency communications. New subtypes in this subtree follow the rules specified in Section 3.1 of [RFC6838], with the additional restriction that the standards-related organization MUST be responsible for some aspect of emergency communications. This subtree initially contains the following subtypes (defined here or in [RFC7852]): emergencyCallData.control+xml EmergencyCallData.Comment+xml EmergencyCallData.DeviceInfo+xml EmergencyCallData.MSD EmergencyCallData.ProviderInfo+xml EmergencyCallData.ServiceInfo+xml EmergencyCallData.SubscriberInfo+xml 14.2. Service URN Registrations IANA is requested to register the URN 'urn:service:sos.ecall' under the sub-services 'sos' registry defined in Section 4.2 of [RFC5031]. This service requests resources associated with an emergency call placed by an in-vehicle system, carrying a standardized set of data related to the vehicle and incident. Two sub-services are registered as well: urn:service:sos.ecall.manual Used with an eCall invoked due to manual interaction by a vehicle occupant. urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic Used with an eCall invoked automatically, for example, due to a crash or other serious incident. IANA is also requested to register the URN 'urn:service:test.sos.ecall' under the sub-service 'test' registry defined in Setcion 17.2 of [RFC6881]. This service requests resources associated with a test (non-emergency) call placed by an in-vehicle system. See Section 8 for more information on the test eCall request URN. 14.3. MIME Media Type Registration for 'application/ emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' IANA is requested to add application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD as a MIME media type, with a reference to this document, in accordance to the procedures of RFC 6838 [RFC6838] and guidelines in RFC 7303 [RFC7303]. MIME media type name: application MIME subtype name: emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD Mandatory parameters: none Optional parameters: none Encoding scheme: binary Encoding considerations: Uses ASN.1 PER, which is a binary encoding; when transported in SIP, binary content transfer encoding is used. Security considerations: This media type is designed to carry vehicle and incident-related data during an emergency call. This data contains personal information including vehicle VIN, location, direction, etc. Appropriate precautions need to be taken to limit unauthorized access, inappropriate disclosure to third parties, and eavesdropping of this information. Sections 9 and Section 10 of [RFC7852] contain more discussion. Interoperability considerations: None Published specification: Annex A of EN 15722 [msd] Applications which use this media type: Pan-European eCall compliant systems Additional information: None Magic Number: None File Extension: None Macintosh file type code: 'BINA' Person and email address for further information: Randall Gellens, rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org Intended usage: LIMITED USE Author: The MSD specification was produced by the European Committee For Standardization (CEN). For contact information, please see <http://www.cen.eu/cen/Pages/contactus.aspx>. Change controller:Block Schema 14. IANA Considerations 14.1. TheEuropean Committee For Standardization (CEN) 14.4. MIMEEmergencyCallData MediaType Registration for 'application/ emergencyCallData.control+xml' IANA is requested to add application/emergencyCallData.control+xml asSubtree This document establishes the "EmergencyCallData" media (MIME) subtype tree, aMIMEnew mediatype,subtree rooted at "application/ EmergencyCallData". This subtree is used only for content associated witha reference to this document,emergency communications. New subtypes inaccordance tothis subtree follow theprocedures of RFC 6838 [RFC6838] and guidelinesrules specified inRFC 7303 [RFC7303]. MIME media type name: application MIME subtype name: emergencyCallData.control+xml Mandatory parameters: none Optional parameters: charset Indicates the character encoding of the XML content. Encoding considerations: Uses XML, which can employ 8-bit characters, depending on the character encoding used. SeeSection3.23.1 ofRFC 7303 [RFC7303]. Security considerations: This media type carries metadata and control information and requests, such as from a Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) to an In-Vehicle System (IVS) during an emergency call. Metadata (such as an acknowledgment that data sent by the IVS to the PSAP was successfully received) has limited privacy and security implications. Control information (such as requests from[RFC6838], with thePSAPadditional restriction that thevehicle perform an action) has some privacy and security implications. The privacy concern arises from the ability to request the vehicle to transmit a data set, which as described in Section 14.3, can contain personal information. The security concern is the ability to request the vehicle to perform an action. Control information needs to originate only from a PSAP or other emergency services provider, and notstandards-related organization MUST bemodified en-route. The level of integrityresponsible for some aspect ofthe cellular network over which theemergencycall is placed is a consideration: whencommunications. This subtree initially contains theIVS initiates an eCall over a cellular network,following subtypes (defined here or inmost cases it relies on[RFC7852]): EmergencyCallData.Comment+xml EmergencyCallData.Control+xml EmergencyCallData.DeviceInfo+xml EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD EmergencyCallData.ProviderInfo+xml EmergencyCallData.ServiceInfo+xml EmergencyCallData.SubscriberInfo+xml 14.2. Service URN Registrations IANA has registered theMNO to routeURN urn:service:sos.ecall under thecall to a PSAP. (Calls placed using other means, such as Wi-Fi or over-the-top services, generally incur somewhat higher levels of risk than calls placed "natively" using cellular networks.) A call-back from a PSAP merits additional consideration, since current mechanisms are not ideal for verifying that such a call is indeed a call-back from a PSAP"'sos' Sub-Services" registry defined inresponse toSection 4.2 of [RFC5031]. This service requests resources associated with an emergency call placed by an in-vehicle system, carrying a standardized set of data related to theIVS. See the discussion in Section 11 and the PSAP Callback document [RFC7090]. Sections 7vehicle andSection 8 of [RFC7852] contain more discussion. Interoperability considerations: None Published specification: This document Applications which use this media type: Pan-Europeanincident. The "Description" registry field is "Vehicle-initiated emergency calls". Two sub-services are registered as well: urn:service:sos.ecall.automatic Used with an eCallcompliant systems Additional information: None Magic Number: None File Extension: .xml Macintosh file type code: 'TEXT' Person and email addressinvoked automatically, forfurther information: Randall Gellens, rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org Intended usage: LIMITED USE Author:example, due to a crash or other serious incident. TheIETF ECRIT WG. Change controller:"Description" registry field is "Automatic vehicle-initiated emergency calls". urn:service:sos.ecall.manual Used with an eCall invoked due to manual interaction by a vehicle occupant. TheIETF ECRIT WG. 14.5. Registration of"Description" registry field is "Manual vehicle- initiated emergency calls". IANA has also registered the'eCall.MSD' entry inURN urn:service:test.sos.ecall under theEmergency Call Additional Data Types"'test' Sub-Services" registry defined in Section 17.2 of [RFC6881]. Thisspecificationservice requestsIANA to add the 'eCall.MSD' entry to the Emergency Call Additional Data Types registry,resources associated with areference to this document;test (non- emergency) call placed by an in-vehicle system. See Section 8 for more information on the'Data About' value is 'The Call'. 14.6.test eCall request URN. 14.3. MIME Media Type Registrationof the 'control' entry in the Emergency Call Additional Data Types registry This specification requestsfor application/ EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD IANAto add the 'control' entry to the Emergency Call Additional Data Types registry,has added application/EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD as a MIME media type, with a reference to thisdocument; the 'Data About' value is 'The Call'. 14.7. Registration for urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control This section registers a new XML namespace, as per the guidelinesdocument, inRFC 3688 [RFC3688]. URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control Registrant Contact: IETF, ECRIT working group, <ecrit@ietf.org>, as delegated byaccordance with theIESG <iesg@ietf.org>. XML: BEGIN <?xml version="1.0"?> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML Basic 1.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/xhtml-basic10.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1"/> <title>Namespace for Emergency Call Data Control Block</title> </head> <body> <h1>Namespace for Emergency Call Data Control Block</h1> <p>See:procedures of RFC8147</p> </body> </html> END 14.8. Registry Creation This document creates a new registry called "Emergency Call Metadata/ Control Data". The following sub-registries are created within this registry. 14.8.1. Emergency Call Action Registry This document creates a new sub-registry called "Emergency Call Action". As defined6838 [RFC6838] and guidelines in[RFC5226], this registry operates under "Expert Review" rules. The expert should determine that the proposed actionRFC 7303 [RFC7303]. MIME media type name: application MIME subtype name: EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD Mandatory parameters: none Optional parameters: none Encoding scheme: binary Encoding considerations: Uses ASN.1 PER, which iswithin the purview ofavehicle,binary encoding; when transported in SIP, binary content transfer encoding issufficiently distinguishable from other actions, and the actionused. Security considerations: This media type isclearlydesigned to carry vehicle andfully described. In most cases, a publishedincident- related data during an emergency call. This data contains personal information including vehicle VIN, location, direction, etc. Appropriate precautions need to be taken to limit unauthorized access, inappropriate disclosure to third parties, andstable document is referenced for the description of the action. The contenteavesdropping of thisregistry includes: Name: The identifier to be used in the 'action' attributeinformation. Sections 9 and 10 ofa control <request> element. Description:[RFC7852] contain more discussion. Interoperability considerations: None Published specification: Annex Adescriptionofthe action. In most casesEN 15722 [MSD] Applications which use thiswill be a reference to a publishedmedia type: Pan-European eCall compliant systems Additional information: None Magic Number: None File Extension: None Macintosh file type code: BINA Person andstable document.email address for further information: Randall Gellens, rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org Intended usage: LIMITED USE Author: Thedescription MUST specify if any attributes or child elements are optional or mandatory, and describeMSD specification was produced by theactionEuropean Committee For Standardization (CEN). For contact information, please see <http://www.cen.eu/cen/Pages/contactus.aspx>. Change controller: The European Committee For Standardization (CEN) 14.4. MIME Media Type Registration for application/ EmergencyCallData.Control+xml IANA has added application/EmergencyCallData.Control+xml as a MIME media type, with a reference tobe taken bythis document, in accordance to the procedures of RFC 6838 [RFC6838] and guidelines in RFC 7303 [RFC7303]. MIME media type name: application MIME subtype name: EmergencyCallData.Control+xml Mandatory parameters: none Optional parameters: charset Indicates thevehicle. The initial setcharacter encoding ofvalues is listed in Table 2. +-----------+--------------------------------------+ | Name | Description | +-----------+--------------------------------------+ | send-data |the XML content. Encoding considerations: Uses XML, which can employ 8-bit characters, depending on the character encoding used. See Section9.1.3.13.2 ofthis document | +-----------+--------------------------------------+ Table 2: Emergency Call Action Registry Initial Values 14.8.2. Emergency Call Action Failure Reason RegistryRFC 7303 [RFC7303]. Security considerations: Thisdocument createsmedia type carries metadata and control information and requests, such as from anew sub-registry called "Emergency Call Action Failure Reason", which contains values for the 'reason' attribute of the <actionResult> element. As defined in [RFC5226], this registry operates under "Expert Review" rules. The expert should determinePublic Safety Answering Point (PSAP) to an In-Vehicle System (IVS) during an emergency call. Metadata (such as an acknowledgment that data sent by theproposed reason is sufficiently distinguishable from other reasonsIVS to the PSAP was successfully received) has limited privacy and security implications. Control information (such as requests from the PSAP that theproposed description is understandablevehicle perform an action) has some privacy andcorrectly worded.security implications. Thecontent of this registry includes: ID: A short string identifying the reason, for use inprivacy concern arises from the'reason' attribute of an <actionResult> element. Description: A description ofability to request thereason. The initial set of values is listed in Table 3. +------------------+------------------------------------------------+ | ID | Description | +------------------+------------------------------------------------+ | damaged | Required components are damaged. | | | | | data-unsupported | Thevehicle to transmit a dataitem referencedset, which as described ina 'send-data' | | | request is not supported. | | | | | security-failure |Section 14.3 can contain personal information. Theauthenticity ofsecurity concern is the ability to requestor the | | | authority oftherequestor couldvehicle to perform an action. Control information needs to originate only from a PSAP or other emergency services providers and not be| | | verified. | | | | | unable |modified en route. Theaction could not be accomplished (a | | | generic error for use when no other codelevel of integrity of the cellular network over which the emergency call is| | | appropriate). | | | | | unsupported | The 'action' valueplaced isnot supported. | +------------------+------------------------------------------------+ Table 3: Emergency Call Action Failure Reason Registry Initial Values 14.9. The emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO package This document registersa consideration: when the'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' INFO package. Both endpoints (theIVSand the PSAP equipment) include 'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' ininitiates an eCall over aRecv-Info header field per [RFC6086] to indicate ability to receive INFO requests carrying data as described here. Support forcellular network, in most cases it relies on the'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' INFO package indicatesMNO to route theabilitycall toreceive eCall related body partsa PSAP. (Calls placed using other means, such asspecifiedWi-Fi or over-the-top services, generally incur somewhat higher levels of risk than calls placed "natively" using cellular networks.) A callback from a PSAP merits additional consideration, since current mechanisms are not ideal for verifying that such a call is indeed a callback from a PSAP in[TBD: THIS DOCUMENT]. An INFO request message carrying body parts relatedresponse to an emergency callas described in [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] has an Info-Package header field set to 'emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD' per [RFC6086]. The requirements of Section 10 of [RFC6086] are addressed in the following sections. 14.9.1. Overall Description This section describes "what type of information is carried in INFO requests associated with the Info Package, and for what types of applications and functionalities UAs can useplaced by theInfo Package." INFO requests associated withIVS. See theemergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO package carry data associated with emergency calls as defineddiscussion in[TBD: THIS DOCUMENT]. The application is vehicle-initiated emergency calls established using SIP. The functionality is to carry vehicle dataSection 11 andmetadata/control information between vehiclesthe PSAP Callback document [RFC7090]. Sections 7 andPSAPs. Refer to [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] for8 of [RFC7852] contain moreinformation. 14.9.2. Applicabilitydiscussion. Interoperability considerations: None Published specification: Thissection describes "why the Info Package mechanism, rather than some other mechanism, has been chosen for the specific use-case...." Thedocument Applications which useof the SIP INFO method is based on an analysis of the requirements against the intentthis media type: Pan-European eCall compliant systems Additional information: None Magic Number: None File Extension: .xml Macintosh file type code: TEXT Person andeffectsemail address for further information: Randall Gellens, rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org Intended usage: LIMITED USE Author: The IETF ECRIT working group Change controller: The IETF ECRIT working group 14.5. Registration of theINFO method versus other approaches (which included the SIP MESSAGE method,"eCall.MSD" Entry in theSIP OPTIONS method,Emergency Call Data Types Registry IANA has added theSIP re-INVITE method, media plane transport, and non-SIP protocols). In particular,"eCall.MSD" entry to thetransport of emergency call data blocks occurs within a SIP emergency dialog, per Section 6, and"Emergency Call Data Types" registry, with a reference to this document; the "Data About" value isnormally carried"The Call". 14.6. Registration of the "Control" Entry in theinitial INVITE request and response;Emergency Call Data Types Registry IANA has added theuse of"Control" entry to theSIP INFO method only occurs when emergency-call-related data needs"Emergency Call Data Types" registry, with a reference tobe sent mid-call. Whilethis document; theSIP MESSAGE method could be used, it"Data About" value isnot tied to"The Call". 14.7. Registration for urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control This section registers aSIP dialognew XML namespace, asis the SIP INFO method and thus might not be associated with the dialog. Eitherper theSIP OPTIONS or re-INVITE methods could also be used, but is seenguidelines in RFC 3688 [RFC3688]. URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:EmergencyCallData:control Registrant Contact: IETF, ECRIT working group, <ecrit@ietf.org>, asless clean thandelegated by theSIP INFO method.IESG <iesg@ietf.org>. XML: BEGIN <?xml version="1.0"?> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML Basic 1.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/xhtml-basic10.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1"/> <title>Namespace for Emergency Call Data Control Block</title> </head> <body> <h1>Namespace for Emergency Call Data Control Block</h1> <p>See RFC 8147</p> </body> </html> END 14.8. Registry Creation This document creates a new registry called "Emergency Call Metadata/ Control Data". TheSIP SUBSCRIBE/NOTIFY method could be coerced into service, but the semanticsfollowing sub-registries arenotcreated for this registry. 14.8.1. Emergency Call Actions Registry This document creates agood fit, e.g., the subscribe/notify mechanism provides one-way communication consisting of (often multiple) notifications from notifier to subscriber indicating that certain events in notifier have occurred, whereas what's needed here is two-way communication of data related to the emergency dialog. Use ofnew sub-registry called "Emergency Call Actions". As defined in [RFC5226], this registry operates under "Expert Review" rules. The expert should determine that themedia plane mechanisms was discounted becauseproposed action is within thenumberpurview ofmessages needing to be exchanged inadialogvehicle, isnormally zero or very few,sufficiently distinguishable from other actions, and is clearly and fully described. In most cases, a published and stable document is referenced for thesizedescription of thedata is likewise very small.action. Theoverhead caused by user plane setup (e.g.,content of this registry includes: Name: The identifier touse MSRP as transport) wouldbedisproportionately large. Based onused in theanalyses,"action" attribute of a control <request> element. Description: A description of theSIP INFO method was chosenaction. In most cases, this will be a reference toprovide for mid-call data transport. 14.9.3. Info Package Name The info package name is emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 14.9.4. Info Package Parameters None 14.9.5. SIP Option-Tags None 14.9.6. INFO Request Body Parts The body for an emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD info package isamultipart (normally multipart/mixed) body containing zero or one application/emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD part (containing an MSD)published andzerostable document. The description MUST specify if any attributes ormore application/emergencyCallData.control+xml (containing a metadata/control object) parts. At least one MSDchild elements are optional ormetadata/control body partmandatory and describe the action to be taken by the vehicle. The initial set of values is listed in Table 1. +-----------+--------------------------------------+ | Name | Description | +-----------+--------------------------------------+ | send-data | See Section 9.1.3.1 of this document | +-----------+--------------------------------------+ Table 1: Emergency Call Actions Registry Initial Values 14.8.2. Emergency Call Action Failure Reasons Registry This document creates a new sub-registry called "Emergency Call Action Failure Reasons", which contains values for the "reason" attribute of the <actionResult> element. As defined in [RFC5226], this registry operates under "Expert Review" rules. The expert should determine that the proposed reason isexpected;sufficiently distinguishable from other reasons and that thebehavior upon receiving an INFO request with neitherproposed description isundefined. The body parts are sent per [RFC6086],understandable and correctly worded. The content of this registry includes: ID: A short string identifying the reason, for use inaddition, to align with with how these body parts are sent in SIP messages other than INFO requests, each associated body part is referenced by a Call-Info header field atthetop level"reason" attribute of an <actionResult> element. Description: A description of theSIP message.reason. Thebody part has a Content-Disposition header fieldinitial setto "By-Reference". An MSD or metadata/control blockof values isalways enclosedlisted in Table 2. +------------------+------------------------------------------------+ | ID | Description | +------------------+------------------------------------------------+ | damaged | Required components are damaged. | | | | | data-unsupported | The data item referenced in amultipart body part (even if it would otherwise be"send-data" | | | request is not supported. | | | | | security-failure | The authenticity of theonly body part inrequest or theSIP message). The innermost multipart that contains only body parts associated with| | | authority of theINFO package has a Content-Dispositionrequestor could not be | | | verified. | | | | | unable | The action could not be accomplished (a | | | generic error for use when no other code is | | | appropriate). | | | | | unsupported | The "action" valueof Info-Package. See [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] for more information. 14.9.7. Info Package Usage Restrictions Usageislimited to vehicle-initiated emergency calls as defined in [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT]. 14.9.8. Rate of INFO Requestsnot supported. | +------------------+------------------------------------------------+ Table 2: Emergency Call Action Failure Reasons Registry Initial Values 14.9. TheSIPEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFOrequest is used within an established emergency call dialog forPackage This document registers thePSAP to requestEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO package in the "Info Packages Registry". Both endpoints (the IVSto send an updated MSD,andfor the IVS to send a requested MSD. Because this is normally done only on manual request ofthe PSAPcall taker (who suspects some aspect of the vehicle state has changed),equipment) include EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD in a Recv-Info header field per [RFC6086] to indicate therate of SIPability to receive INFO requestsassociated withcarrying data as described here. Support for theemergencyCallData.eCall.MSD infoEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO packageis normally quite low (most dialogs are likelyindicates the ability tocontain zero INFO requests, while others might carry an occasional request). 14.9.9. Info Package Security Considerations The MIME media type registrationsreceive eCall related body parts as specifiedfor use within this document. An INFOpackage (Section 14.3 and Section 14.4) contain a discussion of the security and/or privacy considerations specificrequest message carrying body parts related tothat data block.an emergency call as described in this document has an Info-Package header field set to "EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD" per [RFC6086]. The"Security Considerations" and "Privacy Considerations" sectionsrequirements of[TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] discuss security and privacy considerationsSection 10 ofthe data carried[RFC6086] are addressed ineCalls. 14.9.10. Implementation Details See [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] for protocol details. 14.9.11. Examples See [TBD: THIS DOCUMENT] for protocol examples. 15. Contributors Brian Rosen was a co-authorthe following sections. 14.9.1. Overall Description This section describes what type ofthe original document upon which this documentinformation isbased. 16. Acknowledgements We would like to thank Bob Williams and Ban Al-Bakri for their feedback and suggestion; Rex Buddenberg, Lena Chaponniere, Alissa Cooper, Keith Drage, Stephen Edge, Wes George, Mirja Kuehlewind, Allison Mankin, Alexey Melnikov, Ivo Sedlacek, and James Winterbottom for their review and comments; Robert Sparks and Paul Kyzivat for their helpcarried in INFO requests associated with theSIP mechanisms; Mark BakerINFO package andNed Freedfortheir help with the media subtype registration issue. We would like to thank Michael Montag, Arnoud van Wijk, Gunnar Hellstrom,what types of applications andUlrich Dietz for their helpfunctionalities User Agents (UAs) can use the INFO package. INFO requests associated with theoriginal document upon whichEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO package carry data associated with emergency calls as defined in thisdocumentdocument. The application isbased. Christer Holmberg deserves special mention for his many detailed reviews. 17. Changes from Previous Versions RFC Editor: Please remove this section prior to publication. 17.1. Changes from draft-ietf-19 to draft-ietf-20 o Fixed various nits 17.2. Changes from draft-ietf-18 to draft-ietf-19 o Added additional text to "Rate of Info Requests" o Added additional text to "Security Considerations" o Further corrected "content type" to "media type" 17.3. Changes from draft-ietf-17 to draft-ietf-18 o Added reference to 3GPP TS24.229 o Clarified that an INFO requestvehicle-initiated emergency calls established using SIP. The functionality isexpectedtohave at least one MSD orcarry vehicle data and metadata/controlbody part o Fixed minor errors in examples o Corrected "content type" to "media type" o Deleted "xsi:schemaLocation" from examples 17.4. Changes from draft-ietf-16 to draft-ietf-17 o Clarify Content-Disposition value ininformation between vehicles and PSAPs. 14.9.2. Applicability This section describes why the INFOrequests 17.5. Changes from draft-ietf-15 to draft-ietf-16 o Various clarifications and simplifications o Added reference to 3GPP 23.167 17.6. Changes from draft-ietf-14 to draft-ietf-15 o eCall body parts now always sent enclosed in multipart (even if only body part inpackage mechanism, rather than some other mechanism, has been chosen for the specific use case. The use of the SIPmessage)INFO method is based on an analysis of the requirements against the intent andhence always have a Content- Dispositioneffects ofBy-Reference o Fixed errors in attribute directionality text o Fixed typos. 17.7. Changes from draft-ietf-13 to draft-ietf-14 o Added text totheIANA Considerations to formalizeINFO method versus other approaches (which included theEmergencyCallData media subtree o Fixed some typos 17.8. Changes from draft-ietf-12 to draft-ietf-13 o Clarifications suggested by Christer o Corrections to Content-Disposition textSIP MESSAGE method, the SIP OPTIONS method, the SIP re-INVITE method, media-plane transport, andexamples as suggested by Paul Kyzivat o Clarifications to Content-Disposition textnon-SIP protocols). In particular, the transport of emergency call data blocks occurs within a SIP emergency dialog, per Section 6, andexamples to clarify that handling=optionalisonly usednormally carried in the initial INVITE17.9. Changes from draft-ietf-11 to draft-ietf-12 o Fixed errors in examples found by Dale o Removed enclosing sub-section of INFO package registration section o Added text per Christer and Dale's suggestions that the MSDrequest andmetadata/control blocks are sent in INFO with a Call-Info header field referencing them o Deleted Call Routing section (7.1) in favor of a statement that call routing is outsideresponse; thescopeuse of thedocument o Other text changes per comments received from Christer and Ivo. 17.10. Changes from draft-ietf-09 to draft-ietf-11 o Renamed INFO package to emergencyCallData.eCall.MSD o ChangedSIP INFOpackage tomethod onlypermit MSD and metadata/control MIME types o Moved <capabilities> element back from car-crash but made it OPTIONAL o Moved other extension points back from car-crash so that extension points are in base spec (and also to get XML schemaoccurs when emergency-call-related data needs tocompile) o Text changes for clarification. 17.11. Changes from draft-ietf-08be sent mid call. While the SIP MESSAGE method could be used, it is not tied todraft-ietf-09 o Createdanew "Data Transport" section that describes howSIP dialog as is theMSDSIP INFO method andmetadata/control blocksthus might not be associated with the dialog. Either SIP OPTIONS or re-INVITE methods could also be used, but they areattached, and then referred to that section ratherseen as less clean thanrepeattheinformation aboutSIP INFO method. The SIP SUBSCRIBE/NOTIFY method could be coerced into service, but the semantics are not a good fit, e.g., theCID and Call-Info and so forth, which means most referencessubscribe/notify mechanism provides one-way communication consisting of (often multiple) notifications from notifier tothe additional-data draftsubscriber indicating that certain events in notifier havenow been deleted o Mentioned edge cases where a PSAP responseoccurred, whereas what's needed here is two-way communication of data related toINVITE isn't received bytheIVS o Reworded descriptionemergency dialog. Use ofwhich status codes are used when a PSAP wishesmedia-plane mechanisms was discounted because the number of messages needing torejectbe exchanged in acall but inform the vehicle occupants that itdialog isawarenormally zero or very few, and the size of thesituationdata is likewise very small. The overhead caused by user-plane setup (e.g., to use the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) as transport) would bemore definite o Added examples showingdisproportionately large. Based on the analyses, the SIP INFOo Added references for eCall test call requirement o Described meaning of eCall URNs in Section 8 as well as in IANA registration 17.12. Changes from draft-ietf-07 to draft-ietf-08 o eCall MSD now encoded as ASN.1 PER, using binary content transfer encoding o Added textmethod was chosen topoint out aspects of call handling and metadata/ control usage, such as use in rejected calls,provide for mid-call data transport. 14.9.3. INFO Package Name The INFO package name is EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD 14.9.4. INFO Package Parameters None 14.9.5. SIP Option-Tags None 14.9.6. INFO Request Body Parts The body for an EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO package is a multipart (normally multipart/mixed) body containing zero or one application/EmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD parts (containing an MSD) andsolicited MSDs o Revised use ofzero or more application/EmergencyCallData.Control+xml (containing a metadata/control object) parts. At least one MSD or metadata/control body part is expected; the behavior upon receiving an INFOto require that when arequestfor an MSDwith neither is undefined. The body parts are sent per [RFC6086], and inINFO, the MSDaddition, to align with how these body parts are sent inresponse is in its own INFO, not the response to the requesting INFO o Added material toSIP messages other than INFOpackage registation to comply with Section 10 of [RFC6086] o Moved material not requiredrequests, each associated body part is referenced by3GPP into [I-D.ietf-ecrit-car-crash], e.g., some ofa Call-Info header field at theeCall metadata/ control elements, attributes, and values o Revised test call wording to clarify that specific handling is outtop level ofscope o Revised wording throughoutthedocument to simplify o Moved new Section 7.1 to beSIP message. The body part has asubsection of 7 o Moved new Section Section 14.9Content-Disposition header field set tobe a main section instead of"By-Reference". An MSD or metadata/control block is always enclosed in asubsection of Section 9 o Revisedmultipart body part (even if it would otherwise be the only body part in the SIP message). The outermost multipart that contains only body parts associated with the INFOusage andpackageregistration per advice from Robert Sparks and Paul Kyzivat 17.13. Changes from draft-ietf-06 to draft-ietf-07 o Fixed typo in Acknowledgements 17.14. Changes from draft-ietf-05 to draft-ietf-06 o Added additional security and privacy clarifications regarding signed and encrypted data o Additional security and privacy text o Deleted informative section on ESINets as unnecessary. 17.15. Changes from draft-ietf-04has a Content-Disposition value of "Info-Package". 14.9.7. INFO Package Usage Restrictions Usage is limited todraft-ietf-05 o Reworked the security and privacy considerations material in the documentvehicle-initiated emergency calls asa whole anddefined inthe MIME registation sectionsthis document. 14.9.8. Rate ofthe MSD and control objects o Clarified that the <actionResult> element can appear multiple timesINFO Requests The SIP INFO request is used within an<ack> element o Fixed IMS definition o Added clarifying textestablished emergency call dialog for the'msgid' attribute 17.16. Changes from draft-ietf-03 to draft-ietf-04 o Added Privacy Considerations section o Reworded most uses of non-normative "may", "should", "must", and "recommended." o Fixed nits in examples 17.17. Changes from draft-ietf-02PSAP todraft-ietf-03 o Addedrequest the IVS toenable cameras o Improved examples and XML schema o Clarificationssend an updated MSD andwording improvements 17.18. Changes from draft-ietf-01 to draft-ietf-02 o Added clarifying text reinforcing that the data exchange isforsmall blocks of data infrequently transmitted o Clarified that dynamic media is conveyed using SIP re-INVITEthe IVS toestablishsend aone-way media stream o Clarified that the scoperequested MSD. Because this isthe needsnormally done only on manual request ofeCall withintheSIP emergencyPSAP callenvironment o Added informative statement thattaker (who suspects some aspect of thedocument may be suitable for reuse by other ACN systems o Clarified that normative language forvehicle state has changed), thecontrol block applies to both IVS and PSAP o Removed 'ref', 'supported-mime', and <media> elements o Minor wording improvements and clarifications 17.19. Changes from draft-ietf-00 to draft-ietf-01 o Added further discussionrate oftest calls o Added further clarification toSIP INFO requests associated with thedocument scope o Mentioned that multi-region vehicles may need to support other crash notification specifications in additionEmergencyCallData.eCall.MSD INFO package is normally quite low (most dialogs are likely toeCall o Added details of the eCall metadata and control functionality o Added IANA registration for thecontain zero INFO requests, while others might carry an occasional request). 14.9.9. INFO Package Security Considerations The MIME media type registrations specified forthe control object o Added IANA registries for protocol elements and tokens used in the control object o Minor wording improvements and clarifications 17.20. Changes from draft-gellens-03 to draft-ietf-00 o Renamed from draft-gellens- to draft-ietf-. o Added mention of and reference to ETSI TR "Mobile Standards Group (MSG); eCall for VoIP" o Added text to Introduction regarding migration/co-existence being out of scope o Added mention in Security Considerations that even if the network- supplied location is just the cell site,use with thiscan be useful as a sanity check on the IVS-supplied location o Minor wording improvements and clarifications 17.21. Changes from draft-gellens-02 to -03 o Clarifications and editorial improvements. 17.22. Changes from draft-gellens-01 to -02 o Minor wording improvements o Removed ".automatic" and ".manual" from "urn:service:test.sos.ecall" registrationINFO package (Sections 14.3 and 14.4) contain a discussiontext. 17.23. Changes from draft-gellens-00of the security and/or privacy considerations specific to-01 o Now using 'EmergencyCallData'that data block. See Sections 11 and 12 forpurpose parameter valuesa discussion of the security andMIME subtypes,privacy considerations of the data carried inaccordance with changes to [RFC7852] o Added reference to RFC 6443 o Fixed bug that caused Figure captions to not appear 18.eCalls. 14.9.10. Implementation Details See Sections 6 and 7 for protocol details. 14.9.11. Examples See Section 10 for protocol examples. 15. References18.1.15.1. Normative References[msd] CEN, ,[MSD] European Committee for Standardization, "Intelligent transport systems--- eSafety--- eCall minimum set of data(MSD),(MSD)", Standard: CEN - EN15722",15722, April 2015. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>. [RFC5031] Schulzrinne, H., "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for Emergency and Other Well-Known Services", RFC 5031, DOI 10.17487/RFC5031, January 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5031>. [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>. [RFC6086] Holmberg, C., Burger, E., and H. Kaplan, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) INFO Method and Package Framework", RFC 6086, DOI 10.17487/RFC6086, January 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6086>. [RFC6838] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13, RFC 6838, DOI 10.17487/RFC6838, January 2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6838>. [RFC6881] Rosen, B. and J. Polk, "Best Current Practice for Communications Services in Support of Emergency Calling", BCP 181, RFC 6881, DOI 10.17487/RFC6881, March 2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6881>. [RFC7303] Thompson, H. and C. Lilley, "XML Media Types", RFC 7303, DOI 10.17487/RFC7303, July 2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7303>. [RFC7852] Gellens, R., Rosen, B., Tschofenig, H., Marshall, R., and J. Winterbottom, "Additional Data Related to an Emergency Call", RFC 7852, DOI 10.17487/RFC7852, July 2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7852>.18.2.15.2. Informative references [CEN] "European Committee forStandardization",Standardization (CEN)", <http://www.cen.eu>. [EN_16062]CEN, ,European Committee for Standardization, "Intelligent transport systems--- eSafety--- eCall High Level Application Requirements (HLAP) Using GSM/UMTS Circuit SwitchedNetworks,Networks", Standard: CEN - EN16062",16062, April 2015. [EN_16072]CEN, ,European Committee for Standardization, "Intelligent transport systems--- eSafety-- Pan- European- Pan-European eCall operatingrequirements,requirements", Standard: CEN - EN16072",16072, April 2015.[I-D.ietf-ecrit-car-crash] Gellens, R., Rosen, B., and H. Tschofenig, "Next- Generation Vehicle-Initiated Emergency Calls", draft-ietf- ecrit-car-crash-23 (work in progress), January 2017. [ITU.X691] International Telecommunications Union, , "Information technology -- ASN.1 encoding rules: Specification of Packed Encoding Rules (PER), ITU-T X.691", July 2002, <https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com17/languages/ X.691-0207.pdf>.[MSG_TR] ETSI,, "ETSI Mobile"Mobile Standards Group (MSG); eCall for VoIP", ETSITechnical ReportTR 103 140V1.1.1 (2014-04),V1.1.1, April 2014. [RFC5012] Schulzrinne, H. and R. Marshall, Ed., "Requirements for Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies", RFC 5012, DOI 10.17487/RFC5012, January 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5012>. [RFC5069] Taylor, T., Ed., Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and M. Shanmugam, "Security Threats and Requirements for Emergency Call Marking and Mapping", RFC 5069, DOI 10.17487/RFC5069, January 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5069>. [RFC6443] Rosen, B., Schulzrinne, H., Polk, J., and A. Newton, "Framework for Emergency Calling Using Internet Multimedia", RFC 6443, DOI 10.17487/RFC6443, December 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6443>. [RFC7090] Schulzrinne, H., Tschofenig, H., Holmberg, C., and M. Patel, "Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) Callback", RFC 7090, DOI 10.17487/RFC7090, April 2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7090>. [RFC7378] Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and B. Aboba, Ed., "Trustworthy Location", RFC 7378, DOI 10.17487/RFC7378, December 2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7378>. [RFC8148] Gellens, R., Rosen, B., and H. Tschofenig, "Next- Generation Vehicle-Initiated Emergency Calls", RFC 8148, DOI 10.17487/RFC8148, May 2017, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8148>. [SDO-3GPP]"3d"3rd Generation PartnershipProject",Project (3GPP)", <http://www.3gpp.org/>. [SDO-ETSI] "European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI)", <http://www.etsi.org>. [TS22.101] 3GPP,, "3GPP TS 22.101: Technical Specification Group Services and"Universal Mobile Telecommunications SystemAspects;(UMTS); Service aspects; Serviceprinciples".principles", 3GPP TS 22.101, version 8.7.0, Release 8, January 2008. [TS23.167] 3GPP,, "3GPP TS 23.167: IP"IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) emergencysessions".sessions", 3GPP TS 23.167, version 9.6.0, Release 9, March 2011. [TS24.229] 3GPP,, "3GPP TS 24.229: IP"IP multimedia call control protocol based on Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Session Description Protocol (SDP); Stage3".3", 3GPP TS 24.229, version 12.6.0, Release 12, October 2014. Acknowledgments We would like to thank Bob Williams and Ban Al-Bakri for their feedback and suggestions; Rex Buddenberg, Lena Chaponniere, Alissa Cooper, Keith Drage, Stephen Edge, Wes George, Mirja Kuehlewind, Allison Mankin, Alexey Melnikov, Ivo Sedlacek, and James Winterbottom for their review and comments; Robert Sparks and Paul Kyzivat for their help with the SIP mechanisms; and Mark Baker and Ned Freed for their help with the media subtype registration issue. We would like to thank Michael Montag, Arnoud van Wijk, Gunnar Hellstrom, and Ulrich Dietz for their help with the original document upon which this document is based. Christer Holmberg deserves special mention for his many detailed reviews. Contributors Brian Rosen was a co-author of the original document upon which this document is based. Authors' Addresses Randall Gellens Core Technology Consulting Email:rg+ietf@randy.pensive.orgrg+ietf@coretechnologyconsulting.com URI: http://www.coretechnologyconsulting.com Hannes Tschofenig Individual Email: Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net URI: http://www.tschofenig.priv.at