Considering how long and painful the "retrofit" (RFC 4412) for SIP was, yes, I think it is important to plan for it early.
Janet . ietf-boun...@ietf.org wrote on 05/25/2013 03:10:07 AM: > From: Jari Arkko <jari.ar...@piuha.net> > To: James Polk <jmp...@cisco.com> > Cc: "ietf@ietf.org list" <ietf@ietf.org> > Date: 05/25/2013 03:10 AM > Subject: WebRTC and emergency communications (Was: Re: IETF Meeting > in South America) > Sent by: ietf-boun...@ietf.org > > James: > > > did you know that you have a audio/video realtime interactive > communications WG churning out proposals and solutions that is > *actively* ignoring "emergency communications" in its entirety? No? > Look at RTCweb, which will become a dominant form of interactive > communications between humans in the near future. You have an > equally active WG in the same area that is addressing emergency > communications (ECRIT) that is further along/mature in its documents > (i.e., they've already produced the bulk of their RFCs, specifically > RFC 6443 and 6881). > > > > Given that young people already think contacting a local emergency > call center (PSAP) can or should be achievable through SMS, IM, > twitter and Facebook... just how long does anyone think it will be > before calling 911/112/999 will be requested or mandated through > WEBrtc/RTCweb? > > > > Waiting will only make it more painful to retrofit it into the > future RFCs produced by RTCweb. > > I knew that WebRTC is happening fast, including implementations > coming out before standards. I don't think everyone have yet > realised the full impact this technology will have. > > I didn't know about the details of the emergency communications > situation. But it is always difficult to balance getting something > out early vs. complete. I know how much pressure there is on the > working groups to keep up with things actually happening in the > browsers and organisations setting up to use this technology. Do you > think the retrofit will be problematic, and do you have a specific > suggestion about what should be included today? > > Jari >
