2014 NENA Critical Issues Forum

N E N A C r i t i c a l I s s u e s F o r u m | O c t o b e r 2 0 1 4 | O r l a n d o , F l o r i d a

2014 NENA Critical Issues ForumNG9-1-1 – Are We There Yet?

NENA: The 9-1-1 Association


Access to CIF PPTs and Notes

nena.org/cif/notes

WiFi: NENA2014 Code:

ndccif14


The Journey to Next Generation 911John Chiaramonte, ENP, PMP

Sr. Program LeaderMission Critical Partners


A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step.

-- Lao Tzu


Where We’ve Been

1900’s – Emergency calling started with “street boxes”, then

became operator-assisted

1968 – First 911 call made in Haleyville, Alabama

Late 1970’s – “Enhanced 911” (ANI with selective routing) debuts

March 1998 – First Phase I wireless call

October 26, 1999 – “911” is designated as the universal

emergency telephone number

2001 – NENA’s 9-1-1 Future Path Plan is released

2003 – NENA begins NG9-1-1 architecture and project

Dec. 2004 – US DOT begins the NG911 Initiative


Where We Are Today

Nearly 6,000 PSAPs across the U.S.

Handling ~240M calls per year (?)

98% of PSAPs provide some Phase II

> 335M wireless devices in the U.S.

> 400K wireless 911 calls per day

Over 39% of households are wireless only

Nearly two-thirds of adults aged 25–29

(65.7%) are wireless only

Several states have established state or regional ESInets


911 CAPABILITY E911 NG911

Voice Calls Yes Yes

Transfer Misrouted Calls Limited Capability Yes

Location Delivered with Calls

No Yes*

Policy-Based Call Routing Managed by E911 SSPManaged by PSAP /

911 Authority

Text/Multimedia No (except TTY/TDD) Yes*

Additional Data No Yes*

Data Sharing Across Regions

No Yes

Data Sharing with Responders

Limited Capability Yes

Standards-Based No – ProprietaryOpen Standards

Compliant

Backup PSAP capabilities Limited / Fixed Local Enhanced / Flexible* These services require next generation originating networks as well as NG911

Comparing E911 and NG911


Why Is NG911 Important?

Changing consumer habits and expectations

Eliminating limitations existing in today’s 911

Efficiencies in 911 technology, ops, funding

Migration away from TDM to IP networks / eventual PSTN retirement

Ensuring equal access for all 911 callers

Improving responder safety / access to data

Enhancing resiliency, reliability, survivability, and flexibility for PSAPs


Current Advancements in 911

Text-to-911Telematics / sensorsState-level call routingRegional ESInetsGIS technologies / data“i3-ready” componentsData analyticsNG911 planning / cost efficiencies


“Near” Future for 911 / NG911 Full i3-compliant components / implementations

Policy Routing Function (PRF)

Caller Information Database (CIDB)

Real-Time Text (RTT)

Migration of tabular MSAGs to a geospatial address validation

process (LVF)

All-IP communications (caller to PSAP to first responders and

beyond)

Increased interoperability – RoIP / FirstNet


Beyond NG911

“Technically nothing”

Enhanced state and national situational

awareness through real-time analytics

Full use of additional data

National and international interoperability

Full integration with n-1-1 services, poison

control, ITS systems


The road to NG911 will be long, but fruitful

-- anonymous


NENA NG9-1-1: What Do I Definitely Need Now?

Nate Wilcox


All kinds of stuff to pick from

BCF

SBC

Firewall

LNG

PIF

LIF

NIF

ESRP

PRF

ECRF

LVF

• LPG• PIF• LIF• NIF

• LIS• LSRG

• PIF• LIF• NIF

• GIS Data Provisioning• Geocoded• Point data

• Transport• Existing• New

• Staff• Existing• Contractor


Initial questions to ask

(Asked after setting reliability and security standards for the

system)

Where am I getting my calls from?

Will I be using NG capable PSAP CPE?

How good is my GIS data?

What can I afford?

What kind of talent do I have on staff?


Where am I getting my calls from? Legacy SR..

BCF

SBC

Firewall

LNG

PIF

LIF

NIF

ESRP

PRF

ECRF

LVF


• LIS• LSRG






Will I be using NG capable CPE? Yes

BCF

SBC

Firewall

LNG

PIF

LIF

NIF

ESRP

PRF

ECRF

LVF


• LIS• LSRG






How good is my GIS data? Crappy

BCF

SBC

Firewall

LNG

PIF

LIF

NIF

ESRP

PRF

ECRF

LVF


• LIS• LSRG






What can I afford? Not a lot

BCF

SBC

Firewall

LNG

PIF

LIF

NIF

ESRP

PRF

ECRF

LVF


• LIS• LSRG






What kind of talent do I have on staff? IT talent BCF

SBC

Firewall

LNG

PIF

LIF

NIF

ESRP

PRF

ECRF

LVF


• LIS• LSRG






Additional questions

How many PSAPs will be on the system?

What sort of data requirements will my PSAPs

need?

How progressive are the telecom service

providers in my area?

What do I want to do in the future?

Why am I really moving to NG9-1-1?


NENA NG9-1-1Standards

Roger Hixson


The Operational Impacts (So Far)Bob Gasper, Tech Support Mgr.State of Maine


Maine Overview

1.25 Million Population

Statewide 911 system (since 2001)

26 PSAPs

4 State

14 County

8 Municipal/Regional


Maine Overview

State staff of 9

911 Advisory Council

Surcharge 45¢ per month for wireline,

wireless and VoIP; 45¢ point of sale prepaid

per transaction

911 contract, training, EMD and state admin staff

NG911 Project cost: $32 million over 6½ years


Next Gen Data Preparation

1995 – 911 Addressing at State level

2006 – MSAG/GIS SAG Compare

2009 – GIS served up to PSAPs for mapping

2009 – Transferred MSAG change control to GIS

from 911 database provider

Participated in GIS standards development and

built adjusted data layers accordingly

2013 – Centralized GIS services within the State


Next Generation Planning

Jan 2011 – Developed “Plan for Next

Generation 911”

Aug 2011 – Issued an RFP for Statewide

NG911

Feb 2013 – Signed a contract with

FairPoint Communications(begin 18 mos)


Maine NG 911 Project

End-to-end replacement of State’s E911 system

Existing equipment at end of useful life

Prime contractor, FairPoint, responsible for all

components of the system from the CPE through the

core, training, system monitoring and 24x7 repair

Based on NENA i3 standards

Contract requires all PSAPs (26) converted by

August 2014 (18 months)


Overall System Design

Fairpoint Communications

PM and IT Design/Data Center Services

Primary Support and Training

Partnered with:

Solacom – LSRG, ESRP/PRF and PSAP CPE

9-1-1 Datamaster – ALI/LIS

GeoComm – GIS, ECRF, LVF & PSAP Mapping


Migration Steps and Timeline

Turn-up, test and accept core network – 6 months

Core network includes:

Data centers housing the ESRP/PRF(s), ECRF/LVF(s),

LSRG(s), BCF(s) and ALI/LIS(s)

Migrating all PSAPs to a new legacy ALI platform (ALI/LIS)

Building out core network between data centers

Turning up the training center at Vassalboro (14 positions)

Commence building out network (complete network build

out took approximately 11 months)


Migration Steps and Timeline

Continued testing and “soak” –

2 months +/-

Build-out, testing/transition &

training for all PSAPs

Final system soak – 30 days +/-


GIS Transition to NG911

1999 – RCL maintenance

2004 – PSAP mapping support

2012 – Address point development

NG Analysis

Analysis

NG Attribute development


New Roles for GIS Personnel

Higher degree of maintenance requirements

Criticality of edits

Web based Change Request and editing

Criticality of discrepancy report process

Change Requests

Municipal and PSAP

Provisioning – Daily

QC Processes

Discrepancy reports

Updated Daily (per business day)


Call Taker Training

Fairpoint responsible for transition training

Built a PSAP to be used exclusively for training; takes

live calls of all different types

475 call takers will go through one day of transition

training

2/3 day Solacom Guardian

1/3 day GeoComm GeoLynx

Training required to deliver within 2 weeks of PSAP

conversion


Impact on Call Takers

Legacy System

Map was static – provided

location of callers

Functionality could be

customized for PSAPs

Speed dials and call taker

logins managed locally

Calls did not roll from one

PSAP to another; busy out

needed to be done by

service response center

NG911 Map provides the selective

transfer information based

on the location of the caller

Core services means less

local customization; more

global settings

Calls will roll to another

PSAP based on a global time

setting or if all call takers

are logged out or not ready

Speed can be done globally

and locally


Impact on State Staff

GIS Staff moved to

ESCB last year

GIS is not a project but

a critical component

GIS used to be a

daytime job but now

needs to be on call –

cultural shift

Defining new roles and

responsibilities

Legacy E911 Database

Manager

Service provider changes

Adding new call taker log ins

Paperless location error

reporting

Reviewing automated error

logs


Central Core Approach

Facilitates standardization (consensus on desktop layout)

Problem discovery is quicker (pattern recognition,

everybody has same problem)

Problem resolution is quicker

Implementation of system patches or updates is quicker

Less need for LEC technicians at the PSAP

Ability to attach call recording to the call record in MIS

system

Much lighter backroom space/equipment req’ts


Other Considerations

VoIP calls sound different (no side tone)

Wireless Phase I calls will increase

Rolling Profiles for Call takers

Consider Administrative remote access

GIS driven system allows Selective Transfer capability

on Wireless Phase 2 calls (COF value is critical)

System redundancy

Continue to hold PSAP meetings to solicit feedback


Next Steps

Just the first step!!!

Last PSAP migrated to NG911 system on July 23rd

Long term - Migrate service providers from LNG to

IP connections

Test and accept new technologies as they become

available

Pass call record data onto responder(s)

Stay informed about i3 standards development


PSAP Call taker Screen


PSAP Call taker Map


PSAP Mouse and Genovation Pad


PSAP Back Room Equipment


NENA NG9-1-1Progress

Roger Hixson



2014 NENA Critical Issues Forum

David HollDeputy Director for OperationsPennsylvania Emergency Management Agency


John SnappVP, Senior Technical Officer

Intrado Inc

NENA 2014 CIFWireless Indoor Location


Texting to 9-1-1 Experience

Paul McLaren

Director of Support EngineeringIntrado


Deployment Experience Initial trial in Blackhawk County, Iowa

with iWireless – July 2009

Architecture adopted by ATIS asJ-STD-110

Launched live trials with Verizon Wireless

using automatic Location

Trialed carrier aggregation in Vermont with

AT&T, Sprint and VZW49


Deployment Process

Decide on deployment approach

Deploy and conduct public education

Soft launch - deploy do not announce to public

Choose initial technologyIntegrated with CPE Browser BasedSMS to TTY

50


Deployment ExperiencesFact, Fiction and Myths

Traffic has not overwhelmed the PSAPs

Fraudulent traffic has not been a problem

Emotive/slang characters have not an issue

Delayed or out of sequence messages have not

been a problem

51


Deployment ExperiencesFact, Fiction and Myths

Call takers with Text experience

Current use cases show situational value of text

Individuals unable to speak

When a voice call would be dangerous

When anonymity of text makes a caller choose it

52



Future Technologies

MMES – Multimedia Messaging Emergency

Services• IMS – IP Multimedia (LTE)

• Text

• Real Time Text

• Pictures

• Video

• Carrier provided location (Same used for VoLTE )

Over the Top Applications (OTT)• Independent of carrier

• OTT provider must verify identity of user

• Must trust OTT provider for validity of subscriber

• Apple iMessage , Blackberry Messenger

• Application must provide location

• Works across multiple platforms and carriers

• Supports roaming

• Could provide additional information from user

• Medical, contacts, addresses, bread crumbing, etc.

1 – 0:02


Future Technologies

MMES – Multimedia Messaging Emergency Services• IMS – IP Multimedia (LTE)

• Text

• Real Time Text

• Pictures

• Video

• Carrier provided location (Same used for VoLTE )

Over the Top Applications (OTT)• Independent of carrier

• OTT provider must verify identity of user

• Must trust OTT provider for validity of subscriber

• Apple iMessage , Blackberry Messenger

• Application must provide location

• Works across multiple platforms and carriers

• Supports roaming

• Could provide additional information from user

• Medical, contacts, addresses, bread crumbing, etc.

I need the police. A man just broke into my house. I am in a closet

Carrier: Hawaii CellularCell Address: 123 Main Street, KauaiCell X/Y: 22.08N 159.5WCell Uncertanty:1609PSAP: Kauai Police

This is 9-1-1 What is your exact location

332 Emi road, Koloa

I am hiding in the master closet. Please hurry

The Police are on the way. Stay hidden

1 – 0:26


QuestionsPaul McLaren

Director of Support Engineering720-961-3911

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


From SMS to 9-1-1 to MMES: A Standards Roadmap

Christian Militeau

Director, Industry Standards

Intrado, Inc.


Genesis of a Joint ATIS/TIA Standard

• Desire for same SMS-to-9-1-1 treatment throughout US

regardless of phone technology type or wireless carrier

• ATIS and TIA agree to work a joint standard project for the

development of an SMS-to-9-1-1 standard in March 2012

GSM/UMTS/LTE in scope of ATIS

CDMA2000 in scope of TIA

58


SMS to 9-1-1 Background

• In March 2012, the situation was multiple vendor solutions

implemented per city/county/state.

• Texting to 9-1-1 was in danger of turning into a regional service

unlike nationwide voice E9-1-1.

• Customers learned to expect consistent treatment in dialing 9-1-1

for voice calls throughout the country.

• An industry standard will create the same look and feel nationwide

for SMS-to-9-1-1

59


• Joint activity (WTSC, ESIF and TIA TR45.2) created

J-STD-110, Joint ATIS/TIA Native SMS to 9-1-1 Requirements and Architecture

Specification, which was published in March 2013.

• Provides interim standard that defines the requirements, architecture, and

procedures for SMS text messaging to 9-1-1 emergency services.

• Uses native wireless carrier SMS capabilities.

• Supports legacy (incorporating TTY), next generation (NG9-1-1/i3), and HTTP

solution Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs).

• The definition of interfaces and protocols has been defined for implementation.

60

Scope of the SMS to 9-1-1 Standard


• Works with both SMS-supporting feature phones and smartphones.

• Must have valid SMS subscription.

• Customer will dial “9-1-1” short code as destination address.

Some phones today reject “9-1-1” as an SMS destination address.

• No Over-the-Top (OTT) SMS-like application supported.

• No redesign of SMS service in operator networks.

61

SMS to 9-1-1 Assumptions


• No pre-registration required.

Everybody can use the service with no registration required.

• Only coarse location used to route messages to correct PSAP.

Serving cell site/sector.

Updated lat/long (X/Y) generated by commercial LBS platform.

62

SMS to 9-1-1 Assumptions


Significant Progress to Report

• J-STD-110, Joint ATIS/TIA Native SMS to 9-1-1 Requirements and

Architecture Specification published in March 2013

• Defines the requirements, architecture, and procedures for text

messaging to 9-1-1 emergency services

• Uses native wireless carrier SMS capabilities

• Supports the existing generation and next generation (NG9-1-1)

Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs)

63


Ongoing ATIS/TIA Standards Efforts

CMRS and TCC Provider Implementation Guidelines for the

Joint ATIS/TIA SMS to 9-1-1 Standard (J-STD-110)

Example: TCC distribution network, as monolithic TCC cannot

connect to 6000+ PSAPs.

Published in December 2013

J-STD-110 (Version 2)

Example: TCC-TCC interface, Transfers, Bridging

Planned letter ballot in December 2014

64


J-STD-110 SMS-to-9-1-1 Architecture

65


J-STD-110a SMS-to-9-1-1 Architecture

66


SMS-to-9-1-1 is an Interim Solution

• Longer-term standards-based solution is Multimedia Messaging

Emergency Services (MMES)

• MMES includes text messaging, pictures, videos

• Real Time Text (RTT) may be supported in MMES

• ATIS to begin addressing North American MMES

requirements/standards in 3Q2013.

67


Opportunities for Next Gen Priority Messaging

• SMS originally designed in Europe in early 1990s

• SMS has no priority mechanisms

• MMES may be used by public to reach emergency services. Such

messaging may be given priority (e.g., SIP Invite with sos:urn)

• Messaging protocols for Next Gen could be enhanced to allow for

priority capabilities for emergency services messaging and for 3GPP

Multimedia Priority Service (MPS) users (e.g., government priority

services users)

68


3GPP Multimedia Emergency Services (MMES)

• Messaging component first introduced as Non-Voice Emergency

Services (NOVES) in 3GPP SA1 (see study report in 3GPP TR 22.871)

• 3GPP TS 22.101 Section 10 contains SA1 requirements added for

IMS Multimedia Emergency Sessions (MMES)

• Includes long-term vision of messaging for Next Gen emergency

services

• First version MMES completed in 3GPP Release 11 (Requirements)

69


3GPP MMES Issues to be Resolved

• Real-Time Text (RTT) for real-time (character-at-a-time) service

• SIP Message for message-at-a-time (IM) service

• Whether Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) or Extensible

Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) will assist with session

management for MMES?

• There is a need for the industry to standardize as quickly as

possible the media formats and protocols on which an MMES

texting service will be based

70


P- CSCF E- CSCF ESRP

SelectiveRouter

ECRF

ALI

i3 PSAPBCFIBCFAccess

Network

LRF

RDF

Legacy PSAPMGCF

Mx

MgMl

Le

Le

Gm Mw

CS

Common IMS PS Network

Emergency Services Network

Legacy

i3 ESInet

ici

S- CSCF

MwMw

LS

BGCF

Mi Mj

CS Network

SMSC

HTTPS Browser

to ALIto SR

TCC

Circuit Switched Network

Originating Network

MMES Service Architecture


Questions & Answers

Documents

2014 NENA Critical Issues Forum