One document matched: draft-ietf-ecrit-location-hiding-req-04.xml
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<?rfc toc="yes" ?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc sortrefs="no"?>
<?rfc iprnotified="no" ?>
<?rfc strict="no" ?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc subcompact="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery.xml'>
<!ENTITY RFC5222 PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5222.xml'>
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps.xml'>
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-sipcore-location-conveyance PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-sipcore-location-conveyance.xml'>
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-ecrit-framework PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-ecrit-framework.xml'>
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-geopriv-lbyr-requirements PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-geopriv-lbyr-requirements.xml'>
<!ENTITY RFC5031 PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5031.xml'>
<!ENTITY RFC5069 PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5069.xml'>
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-ecrit-specifying-holes PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-ecrit-specifying-holes.xml'>
]>
<rfc category="info" ipr="pre5378Trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-ecrit-location-hiding-req-04.txt">
<front>
<title abbrev="Location Hiding Requirements">Location Hiding: Problem Statement and Requirements</title>
<author initials="H." surname="Schulzrinne" fullname="Henning Schulzrinne">
<organization>Columbia University</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Department of Computer Science</street>
<street>450 Computer Science Building</street>
<city>New York</city>
<region>NY</region>
<code>10027</code>
<country>US</country>
</postal>
<phone>+1 212 939 7004</phone>
<email>hgs+ecrit@cs.columbia.edu</email>
<uri>http://www.cs.columbia.edu</uri>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="L." surname="Liess" fullname="Laura Liess">
<organization abbrev="Deutsche Telekom">Deutsche Telekom Networks</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Deutsche Telekom Allee 7</street>
<city>Darmstadt</city>
<region>Hessen</region>
<code>64295</code>
<country>Germany</country>
</postal>
<phone> </phone>
<email>L.Liess@telekom.de</email>
<uri>http://www.telekom.de</uri>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="H." surname="Tschofenig" fullname="Hannes Tschofenig">
<organization>Nokia Siemens Networks</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Linnoitustie 6</street>
<city>Espoo</city>
<code>02600</code>
<country>Finland</country>
</postal>
<phone>+358 (50) 4871445</phone>
<email>Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net</email>
<uri>http://www.tschofenig.priv.at</uri>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="B." surname="Stark" fullname="Barbara Stark">
<organization>AT&T</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>725 W Peachtree St, NE</street>
<city>Atlanta</city>
<region>GA</region>
<code>30308</code>
<country>USA</country>
</postal>
<phone>+1 404 499 7026</phone>
<email>barbara.stark@att.com</email>
</address>
</author>
<author initials="A." surname="Kuett" fullname="Andres Kuett">
<organization>Skype</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street/>
<city/>
<region/>
<code/>
<country/>
</postal>
<email>andres.kytt@skype.net</email>
</address>
</author>
<date year="2010"/>
<area>Real-time Applications and Infrastructure</area>
<workgroup>ECRIT</workgroup>
<keyword>Internet-Draft</keyword>
<abstract>
<t>The emergency services architecture developed in the IETF Emergency Context Resolution with
Internet Technology (ECRIT) working group describes an architecture where location
information is provided by access networks to end points or VoIP service providers in order
to determine the correct dial string and information to route the call to a Public Safety
Answering Point (PSAP). For determining the PSAP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) the usage
of the Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Protocol is envisioned. </t>
<t>This document provides a problem statement and lists requirements for situations where the
Internet Access Provider (IAP) and/or the Internet Service Provider (ISP) are only willing
to disclose limited or no location information.</t>
</abstract>
</front>
<middle>
<!-- ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -->
<section anchor="introduction" title="Introduction">
<section title="Emergency Services Architecture">
<t>The emergency services architecture developed in the IETF Emergency Context Resolution
with Internet Technology (ECRIT) working group, see <xref
target="I-D.ietf-ecrit-framework"/>, describes an architecture where location
information is provided by access networks to end points or VoIP service providers in
order to determine the correct dial string and information to route the call to a Public
Safety Answering Point (PSAP). The Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Protocol <xref
target="RFC5222"/> allows callers and other call-routing entities to determine the PSAP
Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for a specific geographical location together with a
service URI <xref target="RFC5031"/>. The basic architecture is shown in Figure 1 of <xref
target="I-D.ietf-ecrit-framework"/> and further detailed in the message flow in Figure 2
of <xref target="I-D.ietf-ecrit-framework"/>. </t>
<t>For emergency services, location information is needed in three ways: <list
style="numbers">
<t>Emergency call routing to the PSAP that is responsible for a specific geographical
region</t>
<t>Dispatch of the emergency personnel to the scene of an accident, crime or other types
of incidents</t>
<t>Additionally, a Voice Service Provider (VSP) may need to verify that an call is
indeed an emergency call and may therefore require location information to ensure that
calls routed to a specific URI point to a PSAP.</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>This document focuses on item (1) and item (3). Providing location information by the ISP
to the PSAP and to the emergency personnel are typically legal obligations covered by
regulatory frameworks.</t>
</section>
<section title="Location Hiding">
<t>Internet Access Providers (IAPs) and Internet Service Providers (ISPs)) typically have
little incentives to provide location information to end hosts or independent VSPs
(without monetary compensation) for any purpose, including for emergency call routing. The
decision to deny disclosure of location information can be driven by a number of technical
and business concerns. Some providers may perceive a risk that allowing users to access
location information for non-emergency purposes or prior to an emergency call will incur
additional server load and thus costs. Other providers may not want to make location
information available without the ability to charge for it. Yet others fear problems with
regard to privacy when disclosing location information to potentially unknown third
parties.</t>
</section>
<section title="Location by Reference">
<t>The work on the Location Configuration Protocol (LCP) indicated the need to provide the
capability to obtain Location-by-References (LbyRs) in addition to Location-by-Value
(LbyV) from a Location Information Server (LIS).</t>
<t> The LCP problem statement and requirements document can be found in <xref
target="I-D.ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps"/>. The requirements for obtaining an LbyR via the
LCP and the corresponding dereferencing step can be found in <xref
target="I-D.ietf-geopriv-lbyr-requirements"/>. </t>
<t>HTTP Enabled Location Delivery (HELD), see <xref
target="I-D.ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery"/>, is an instantiation of the LCP
concept and allows LbyVs and LbyRs to be requested. </t>
<t>A location reference may already satisfy the requirement for location hiding if the PSAP
has the appropriate credentials to resolve the reference. These credentials allow the
ISP/IAP to authenticate and to authorize the party that would like to request location
information. The policy to obtain these credentials allows ISPs/IAPs to put constraints
under which these credentials are handed out. ISP/IAPs ideally might want to engage in a
business relationship with the VSP to receive a financial compensation for the service
they provide. On the Internet the number of VSPs is potentially large and the VSPs would
not want to enter a business contract with potentially every ISP/IAP worldwide. The number
of potential contracts between ISPs/IAPs and PSAPs is, however, relatively small as they
typically need to have a local relationship as PSAPs provide their emergency services
support in a certain geographical region for which certain ISPs/IAPs have networks
deployed. </t>
<t>Note that the requirement being met here is for delivery of location information to the
PSAP, not for LoST routing or for validation at the VSP. Another obstacle when it comes to
the usage of location reference for location-based routing from a technical point of view
is that a location reference cannot be used as input to LoST <xref target="RFC5222"/>, as
LoST requires location per value rather than a reference. Also, LoST servers may be
operated by independent parties, including VSPs, which again may not be able to resolve
the reference to location by value. (Note that LoST is a protocol used for determining the
location-appropriate PSAP based on location information and a Service URN <xref
target="RFC5031"/>.</t>
</section>
</section>
<!-- ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -->
<section anchor="terminology" title="Terminology">
<t>The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT",
"RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
<xref target="RFC2119"/>, with the important qualification that, unless otherwise stated,
these terms apply to the design of an solution supporting location hiding, not its
implementation or application.</t>
<t>This document reuses terminology from <xref target="I-D.ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps"/>. </t>
</section>
<!-- ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -->
<section anchor="reqs" title="Requirements">
<t>
<list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Req-1:"> There MUST be a way for the ISP/IAP to withhold precise location
information from the endpoint and from the VSP.<vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-2:"> The ISP/IAP MUST support the ability of the endpoint or the VSP to
route emergency calls. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-3:">The VSP MUST be able to validate that a call purported to be an
emergency call is being routed to a bona fide URI, which is denoted by being a URI in
LoST for the designated emergency service. This requirement is provided to deal with
potential security problems described in Section 5.1 of <xref target="RFC5069"
/>.<vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-4:"> The PSAP MUST receive precise location information (by value)
about emergency callers. As such, any solution MUST be able to provide location
information to the PSAP even while withholding it from the emergency caller.</t>
<t hangText="Req-5:"> The proposed solution MUST NOT assume a business or trust
relationship between the caller's VSP and the caller's ISP. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-6:"> A solution MUST consider deployment scenarios where a VSP does not
operate in the same jurisdiction as the PSAP. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-7:"> The solution MUST offer automated discovery of servers and and other
necessary configuration information. No manual configuration can be assumed. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-8:">The steps needed by the endpoint for emergency calling SHOULD be no
different when location is withheld vs. when location is not withheld. In particular,
user agents cannot require additional configuration to discover which particular
environment (hiding or no hiding) they find themselves in. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-9:">The solution SHOULD work without the ISP/IAP having to support SIP
and without the need to utilize SIP between the endpoint and the VSP. <vspace
blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-10:">The solution MUST work if PSAP boundaries have holes. (For a
discussion about holes in PSAP boundaries and their encoding the reader is referred to
<xref target="I-D.ietf-ecrit-specifying-holes"/>.)<vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-11:">The solution MUST NOT assume the existence of Emergency Service
Routing Proxies (ESRPs) per country, state and city. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-12:">The solution MUST consider that service boundaries for different
emergency services may differ, but they overlap at the location of the caller.<vspace
blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-13:"> Though the solution MAY add steps to the emergency call routing
process described in <xref target="I-D.ietf-ecrit-framework"/>, these steps MUST NOT
significantly increase call setup latency. For example, the revised process MUST NOT
include "trial-and-error" operations on its critical path, such as attempts at LbyR
resolutions that may take time to time out. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-14:">The solution MUST allow the end host to determine PSAP/ESRP URLs
prior to the call, for all emergency services. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-15:">The solution MUST allow UAs to discover at least their dial string
ahead of the emergency call. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-16:">The solution MUST have minimal impact on UAs, i.e., a solution is
preferred if it does not require an substantially different emergency services
procedures compared to the procedure of dealing with emergency services where no
location hiding is applied. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-17:">The solution MUST NOT interfere with the use of LoST for
non-emergency services. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-18:">The solution MUST allow emergency calls to reach an IP-to-PSTN
gateway rather than the IP-based PSAP directly. <vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-19:">The solution MUST NOT shift effort (externality), i.e., the
convenience of the location-hiding ISP MUST NOT impose a burden on user agents or
non-hiding ISPs/IAPs and SHOULD NOT impose a burden on VSPs.<vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-20:">The solution SHOULD minimize the impact on LoST, SIP conveyance
<xref target="I-D.ietf-sipcore-location-conveyance"/> and DHCP.<vspace blankLines="1"/></t>
<t hangText="Req-21:">The solution SHOULD NOT break in the presence of NATs and SHOULD
consider the presence of legacy devices, as described in <xref
target="I-D.ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps"/>.</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
<!-- ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -->
<section title="IANA Considerations">
<t>This document does not require actions by IANA.</t>
</section>
<!-- ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -->
<section title="Security Considerations">
<t>This document does not raise additional security consideration beyond those mentioned in
<xref target="I-D.ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps"/> and discussed in this document.</t>
</section>
<!-- ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -->
<section title="Acknowledgments">
<t>We would like to thank the following ECRIT working group members (in no particular order)
for their contributions:</t>
<t>
<list style="symbols">
<t>Andrew Newton (andy@hxr.us) </t>
<t>James Winterbottom (James.Winterbottom@andrew.com) </t>
<t>Brian Rosen (br@brianrosen.net) </t>
<t>Richard Barnes (rbarnes@bbn.com)</t>
<t>Marc Linsner (mlinsner@cisco.com)</t>
<t>Ted Hardie (hardie@qualcomm.com)</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>The authors would also like to thank Ben Campbell for his Gen-ART review. Additionally, we would like to thank Jari Arkko, Alexey Melnikov, Tim Polk, and Dan Romascanu for their IESG review.</t>
</section>
<!-- ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -->
</middle>
<!-- ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -->
<back>
<references title="Normative References">
<reference anchor="RFC2119">
<front>
<title abbrev="RFC Key Words">Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
<author initials="S." surname="Bradner" fullname="Scott Bradner">
<organization>Harvard University</organization>
</author>
<date month="March" year="1997"/>
</front>
<format type="TXT" octets="4723" target="ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2119.txt"/>
</reference>
&I-D.ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps;
&I-D.ietf-sipcore-location-conveyance;
&I-D.ietf-ecrit-framework;
&RFC5069;
&RFC5222;
&I-D.ietf-geopriv-lbyr-requirements;
&RFC5031;
&I-D.ietf-geopriv-http-location-delivery;
&I-D.ietf-ecrit-specifying-holes;
</references>
<references title="Informative References">
</references>
</back>
</rfc>
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-22 06:48:29 |