more on FCC VoIP 911 order

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: DV Henkel-Wallace <gumby () henkel-wallace org>
Date: May 22, 2005 12:22:33 PM EDT
To: N3jmm () aol com
Cc: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Subject: Re: [IP] FCC VoIP 911 order


The implementation, both legal and technical, need not be complex nor  
terribly expensive.  It's the long term implications, as you say,  
that could be bad.

Consider this implementation: the FCC mandates the following: every  
DHCP client sold must accept a new location identifier.  Every  
commercial VOIP phone or service must get this info and pass it on  
for E911 use.  Every commercial dhcp server (e.g. in your cheapo  
"cable router" box) ISP would be required to get this info from the  
ISP (they have that info already anyway) and pass it onto its own  
dhcp clients.  Public access providers (e.g. libraries and cafe  
hotspot operators) would be required to upgrade; the rest of us would  
just do it automatically, accept for those of us who build our own  
gear, relay our traffic over encrypted tunnels, etc.

Writing this up more formally would make for a short RFC.  It would  
cost the government nothing (although the taxpayers would still be  
shouldering the bill as a sort of tax, but it wouldn't be a high one).

And the government already lays all sorts of burdens onto the ISPs.    
I do see this as opening a can of worms since now law is poking into  
protocols themselves, a barrier previously never breached.  THAT  
worries me more than anything else.

(By the way you could argue that protects VoIP services since it  
cauterises a line of attack that some state PUCs (e.g. Texas) have  
been trying to use to attack these services).

-d



> From: N3jmm () aol com
> Date: May 22, 2005 5:01:42 AM EDT
>
> "Finally, the Commission stated its intention to adopt, in a future  
> order, an advanced E911
> solution that includes a method for determining the customer’s  
> location without the customer
> having to self report this information."
>
> I suspect that this is impossible with the present structure of  
> Internet and that requiring it may have unforeseeen implications  
> not to mention cost.





-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/