VoIP + Emergency Services

Forums › VoIP › VoIP + Emergency Services

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

379 posts

Ultimate Geek

#403646 11-Nov-2010 22:47

From memory, the telcos want the Govt to pay for the implementation and setup costs, and the Govt wanted the telcos to pay.

Would help in some situations (some people automatically presume we have this capability because they see it on CSI type programs/know the US has it), but would also potentially increase the "ohhh but why can't you GPS my lost/stolen cellphone" calls that people make.

jourdant

44 posts

Geek

#403806 12-Nov-2010 11:10

sbiddle:
coffeebaron: Then of course there are all those 111 calls from mobiles, no address there either. And no I don't want my GPS to be used for this!

I think E911 (or maybe E111 in NZ) should be mandated by the Government. With their obsession with 111 I'm really surprised this hasn't already happened. Aussie will probably have this mandated by mid 2011.

I completely agree. Getting this sorted would be exactly we need here.

Now... where to find an offshore investor with lots of money.

harrylin

342 posts

Ultimate Geek

#404506 14-Nov-2010 16:01

But many of us use mobile phone to ring 111, does 111 know our location?? Then I think, if we can use voip to get to 111 emergency service, it should be all good. Then we just need to tell them out address.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#404565 14-Nov-2010 18:48

harrylin: But many of us use mobile phone to ring 111, does 111 know our location??

No. That's why the last few posts in this thread discuss making E911 mandatory so that 111 operators are aware of the location of the mobile. This is an important issue now that close to 70% of 111 calls are from mobile phones.

JimBrack

51 posts

Master Geek

#406856 19-Nov-2010 17:55

One reason I went Voip is so I can have regional numbers, My business is based in Northland but I have a Wellington and a ChCh regional number (so my clients can use local calls to contact me) I have called 111 a number of times and it all worked fine the operator (Police) always asked my address, and as my caller id was a 974 number they knew I was using a Internet based phone system.
The only problem I can foresee is if you call 111 and cannot speak for some reason, The Police/Ambos /Fire will find it very hard to trace you. but not impossible. same same with a cellphone!
Jim

Torque

379 posts

Ultimate Geek

#410258 27-Nov-2010 18:46

No, it's not the same with a cellphone. Cellphone traces are much different.

webwat

2036 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#410945 29-Nov-2010 23:35

Beccara: Great! Tell us how we provide numbers to address to 111 services and I'll do it myself for our VOIP platform.

Right now I have asked many and nobody can tell me how a voice provider can link numbers to address, At my last job we got lines via ISDN and our clients connected via VOIP for this, As such we had a huge number of DDI blocks all pointing at our office address, Telecom Wholesale couldn't provide me with an answer and neither can the current supplier in my current role.

I have to admit it's something that has kept me up at night from time to time, Your right sbiddle someone will die at somepoint but the mechanism isn't in place for VoIP providers to provide details to 111 services and thats not something we as a VoIP provider can do anything about

There is nothing stopping a VoIP user moving their system around without telling their provider, so I guess thats what 2talk were saying. To allocate local numbers they should be providing an actual address where the service is likely to be used most of the time, and advise their customer that its important to update this whenever it changes.

I do think a multi tier system would be useful, for example options to allow a voip service to be fixed to a static IP with a semi-fixed address, but with secondary addresses for any remote extension numbers.

Howevever, wasn't Telecom investigating inserting some kind of location detail such as port number etc as part of PPP data? I think the idea was to allow ISPs to offer location related services like emergency service so 111 can tell if the service is being used at the main location.

Time to find a new industry!

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek

#412692 3-Dec-2010 23:33

Ok this is just bonkers, it really is. I didn't read the TFC thing yet, but the posts are really strange in my view.

I've just ported our number to 2talk and have a 3yrold in the house who will be learning 111 shortly so now I'm a bit alarmed.

Why can't the 111 system simply have an address database that's attached to my number that I update with them?

I just call them from my service and say "hey, this number normally lives at 31 Acheson Ave, and is where my 3 yr old is likely to call from."

Yes I get that the service could be anywhere I plug my ATA in.... but ffs, really? Do I need to email 111 a photo showing the ATA screwed to the wall next to the fridge before some common sense prevails?

Do they really have no idea right now where Ben is (yes that's him in the photo with me <-- ) when my 348 73xx number calls them?!

That's just bonkers.

Niel

3267 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#412728 4-Dec-2010 07:49

With XNet you can manage your address yourself. Very simple, log into your account and set it to wherever your device is. 2Talk seems to be behind (in my opinion XNet is always ahead).

You can never have enough Volvos!

Laurence

44 posts

Geek

#412870 4-Dec-2010 20:22

But the question is, is that xnet address available to the 111 services?

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#412872 4-Dec-2010 20:43

Laurence: But the question is, is that xnet address available to the 111 services?

Yes

Laurence

44 posts

Geek

#412873 4-Dec-2010 20:50

Cool, I thought that was the case. How does xnet pass that info through? And what is stopping 2talk doing that same does anyone know?

Noig

446 posts

Ultimate Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#438804 13-Feb-2011 11:12

I have talked to 111 emergency center through voip and they would not disclose if they see my location or not. They said they see my number.
The lady advised me that I should talk to the provider, which I will do asap and report back.

Noig

446 posts

Ultimate Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#441098 18-Feb-2011 11:37

VOIP emergency update to previous post.
Here below an extract ot the reply from my voip provider:
'........As per our terms and conditions ****** plainly state that we are not a traditional phone service and that customers must accept that we are not required to support emergency calls. We do however pass the call to the emergency services call centre if possible. As we are not a traditional service and our numbers are not tied to any physical location the caller will need to provide their location information to the call centre just as they would if calling from a mobile phone. Please see the relevant sections of our terms below.

2.2. You understand that the VoIP service is not a traditional phone service and is provided on a best efforts basis. We will use all reasonable endeavours to make our services available to you at all times, however things beyond on control such as power outages or the performance of your internet connection may disrupt the service we provide.

2.3. You accept that our services are not required to support emergency calls........'

Well that's clear enough to me.
In the meantime we will keep one landline.

Beccara

1469 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#441119 18-Feb-2011 12:20

Thats great if you know your on VoIP, I know of entire apartment blocks and hotels in Wellington that are on VoIP presented as a copper jack in the room, Noone apart from management know's it's VoIP. Or your in one of those FTTH pilot areas and can't get a copper line...

All the clauses in the world wont stop the PR spin machine when someone dies in a VoIP only home either

Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

1 | 2 | 3 | 4