ACMA Calling the Emergency Call Service Review of Arrangements. Response to Questions. Optus. June 2008

(1)

ACMA Calling the Emergency Call Service – Review of Arrangements

Response to Questions

Optus

June 2008

Q1 What measures can VoIP providers take to improve the identification of

the calling number and the caller’s location?

Following is an Optus proposal that could be investigated further and defined through the

Communications Alliance.

For corporate VoIP users, VoIP Service Providers (VSPs) can adopt the following interim

approach till such time new international standards and architectures are developed for better

identification of a corporate VoIP user’s calling location:

Optus’ recommended solution is a scheme that encourages joint responsibility between a

corporate VoIP user and his/her VSP. A corporate VoIP user can be requested to change

his/her new location based on predefined corporate location profiles every time a new log-on

occurs. This scheme will allow the corporate VoIP user to move from one known corporate

location to another known corporate location and maintain the correct address of the caller’s

location in the Integrated Public Number Database (IPND) database.

The scheme would require a two-staged approach:

Pre-logon stage 1:

The VSP’s Administrator can set up a list of pre-defined corporate addresses. The corporate

VoIP user then selects one of these corporate addresses for his/her profile. Each corporate

VoIP user potentially requires multiple profiles within their VoIP service account to reflect

their needs for accessing the VoIP service from each corporate location. The address

information field can not be altered by the corporate VoIP user and can only be changed by

the VSP’s Administrator. Please see figure 1 for example.

(2)

Profile n Profile 2

Profile 1 Address of location A Address of location B

Feature list:

Address of location A Address of location B

Address of location n

The user selects the address from the pre-defined list. This address list is

managed by Administrator

This profile list is managed by user

Figure 1: User profile and Address list

User log-on stage 2:

1. The corporate VoIP user logs-on the VoIP service by entering user identification (ID),

password and his/her nominated profile:

• The VoIP Call Server will verify the user ID, password and nominated profile;

• The VoIP Call Server will then respond to the user with current corporate location

address based on the nominated profile and request for confirmation. Please see

figure 2 for example.

2. Once the user provides a confirmation, the VoIP Call Server then logs the confirmation

information and then proceeds to update the VSP’s Emergency Services System (ESS).

3. The VSP’s ESS in turn updates the IPND database with user’s new location information.

(3)

Please confirm your current location

John Smith, 02 9342 6867 101 Miller St North Sydney 2006

Location Confirmation Screen :

Yes No

Figure 2: Location Confirmation Screen.

To effectively implement this scheme, it is also recommended that:

• The VSP alert the corporate VoIP user of the potential implications for access to

emergency services if the user is not providing a correct location address during log-on

stage. This is recommended to be done upfront at time of the VoIP service activation via

the customer’s service contract and user manuals. If this commitment will not be

honoured by the user, then the user needs to be made aware that he/she will be solely held

liable for his/her actions or inactions;

• The VSP should reiterate & reinforce the above key message during customer training

sessions;

• For nomadic corporate users with short time log-ons outside their corporate locations e.g.

usually at airports or hotels, the address field for the nomadic profile should be data filled

as default to “Address Not Available or Address Unknown”;

• The ability of the IPND database to enable updating needs to be investigated.

• It would assist industry if Communications Alliance (CA) and the IPND manager could

develop an appropriate Industry Guideline for the outlined scheme in order to have a

common & consistent implementation by all Australian VSPs.

Q2 How should emergency services adapt to the increasingly nomadic

nature of VoIP services? What measures should service providers

implement? What measures should the ECP adopt?

Please see response to related Q.1 in this regard.

Emergency Services Organisations (ESOs) should ask the caller for their location for each

and every call to their call centres as they cannot rely upon any location data provided to them

by the Emergency Call Person (ECP). The ECP should ask the caller for their location for

each and every call to their call centres as they cannot rely upon any location data provided to

them by the IPND and ECLIPS databases.

The North American model for VoIP location information may become standardised via ETSI

and ITU and become available in Australia as part of feasible vendor solutions in the future.

Q3 With new access platforms (future NGNs, nomadic services), what new

(4)

VSPs may be able to send information to the ECP via IP links in future instead of via the

current C7 links.

Q4 Should the AAF be set to ‘true’ for all VoIP services, to avoid calls being

misdirected to incorrect ESOs and states?

Yes.

Q5 What technical solutions exist for determining the caller location

information in Australia, with particular reference to emergency calls

from:

(a)

mobile

services;

(b)

satellite

services;

(c)

VoIP

services;

and are there commercial incentives that might facilitate such solutions?

Given that there are more mobile telephone services than fixed PSTN telephone services

in Australia, Optus questions what appears to be an underlying assumption that traditional

fixed PSTN telephone services should be the benchmark for assessing other service types.

Mobile and satellite telephone services introduce a capability to contact emergency

services in circumstances well beyond the capabilities of fixed PSTN telephone services.

This benefit outweighs the location information available as a secondary feature of fixed

PSTN telephone services. Some VoIP services may be used as an alternate service,

supplementing fixed PSTN telephone and mobile telephone services. Is it therefore

necessary to implement all the features of fixed PSTN telephone services in all VoIP

services?

New location-based technologies for mobile telephone services, GPS based satellite

telephone services & GPS based dual mobile/satellite telephone services may emerge that

provide more precise determination of the caller location. The solutions may be specific

to particular technologies and implementations, and it may not be possible to specify

across the board solutions. Any such caller location solutions must have a commercial

basis, as determined by the respective service provider.

Any move towards provision of real time information must also be supported by ESOs. An

overall system approach is needed to ensure that available information can be sent from

CSPs and be accessed and displayed to the ESOs involved with emergency calls.

Q6 How do ECPs and ESOs manage calls from VoIP services in particular,

and can this process be improved?

The ECP and ESOs can ask the caller for their location for every call entering their call

centres with an SMSA Code of 98x and an Alternate Address Flag set to “TRUE”.

Industry, via Communications Alliance (CA), and ACMA should continue to monitor options

for the provision of location information, for example, ECS connect to a Location Database,

along the lines of the North American model for VoIP calls to 911.

Q7 What measures can VoIP providers take to improve the delivery and

accuracy of location information for ECPs and ESOs?

(5)

Please see response to related Q.1 in this regard. Refer also to the response to Q 5.

Q8 What options are available in the short-term to address these concerns?

Please see response to related Q.1 in this regard. Refer also to the response to Q 5.

Q9 Does the process for updating IPND records need to be improved? If so,

how?

The IPND concept contrasts significantly with modern Internet based information sources. If

the service has a nomadic capability and the customer moves location with the service, should

the onus be on the customer to update an appropriate online record versus the service

provider? Would there be benefits from the customer consolidating information about the

range of services used – mobile, fixed, VoIP, messaging etc, address information and

alternative contact points, to be used in a ‘caller no response’ situation? Is the IPND

implementation adequate for current and future service environments where real time updates

may be needed? Is the IPND approach and technology outdated? Note that customers have

the information about the services they have – individual CSPs do not have access to that full

information. Customers are also aware of their current location and the provision of updated

location information as part of the log-on process could be investigated.

Q10 Are the fields currently provided in the IPND record appropriate?

Discussion about data fields in IPND is less important than consideration of how IPND

should operate.

Q11 Is the AAF an appropriate means to highlight ambiguous caller

locations?

For current VoIP calls to ECS- yes.

There seems to be a lot of emphasis on the AAF however it should be noted that it is a current

requirement of the IPND that if AAF is set to True then the Data Provider is required to

provide Contact Name and Number as well (IPND fields 12.1, 12.2 AND 12.3).

Q12 Should ECP operators have to ask every caller for location details,

except for those calling from reliable fixed-line services? If so, how

might the impact on workload and transaction times be managed?

Yes, the ECP operators should ask the caller for location on every call.

ACMA should support initiatives identified by the ECP to reduce manual handling of calls.

Optus’ view is that initiatives to reduce the impact of non-genuine calls to the ECS will have

much greater impact on ECP resources. For example, the blocking of calls to the ECS from

SIM-less handsets will assist to reduce workload that could be better employed to cope with

VoIP calls to the ECS.

(6)

Q13 What possible alternatives provide greater reliability of caller location

(recognising the issues raised in Part 4.1.1)?

Q14

With regard to location-yielding information:

(a) what is the most practical strategy for getting location information to

ESOs?

At present the only strategy is to ask the caller.

(b) what capacity exists for networks to pass on such information

automatically?

None at present.

Optus expects significant changes may need to be made to the equipment used in switching

VoIP calls. The ability of ESOs to receive any such information also needs to be considered

and confirmed before any network based investment is considered.

(c) should a process for collection of location-yielding information by

VSPs be established and maintained? If so, what information should be

included and what arrangements would be appropriate?

It is likely that no individual SP will have all of the information required to locate a VoIP

caller. A potential solution could be to collect information from a number of participants

involved in the delivery of the VoIP service to the caller and to feed this information into a

Location Database.

The Access Network Provider knows the location and service number of physical connection

to the ISP. The ISP knows the IP Address that the ISP has allocated to the broadband Internet

service. The VSP knows the IP Address of the caller and their Service Identifier. While all

participants could potentially feed what they know into a Location Database, there may be

unnecessary information collected as, for example, not every broadband Internet customer

will have a VoIP service.

The ECP and/or the ESO would need the capability to query the Location Database prompted

by the information that has been provided to them by the ECP in the data feed for a particular

VoIP call.

(d) should solutions in this area be driven by regulatory or

non-regulatory intervention? What form should the preferred

intervention take?

These questions pre-suppose that regulatory intervention will produce benefits that outweigh

the costs involved. Again, with reference to the response in Q5, the fundamental capability to

contact the ECP should be acknowledged as providing a benefit to customers. Optus

questions whether the fixed network model should be the benchmark to evaluate

supplementary information about the calls. Any regulatory intervention should be based on

principles established by the Australian Government via the Productivity Commission for any

new regulatory proposals.

(7)

Q15 Is the obligation that VSPs provide clear, unambiguous customer

information about VoIP access to the emergency call service sufficient?

If so, what should be the nature and the extent of that obligation?

Yes. The obligation should be on the same lines as outlined in CA’s VSP documents at URL:

http://www.commsalliance.com.au/Activities/voip.

Q16 Is it reasonable to require that calls made from text telephones to the

106 ECS number using VoIP services be carried to the delivery point

specified by the 106 ECP?

Whether or not a particular VoIP service will support transport of TTY codes is a matter for

the VSP, not the ECS Determination. Some VSPs may be able to provide TTY connectivity

and may therefore provide access to 106.

Other VSPs may support Text over IP, and access to 106 should be enabled for this service.

The ECS Determination should enable access to 106 in circumstances where the VSP is able

to provide connectivity. It should not prescribe the detail of those arrangements, as

circumstances may differ from VSP to VSP.

Service Providers should be permitted to block what can be reliably determined to be

non-genuine, non-text calls to 106.

Q17 Should Type 2 VoIP Out services be required to provide access to the

ECS?

Yes.

If so:

(a) are there any technical issues impeding the requirement that Type 2

VoIP Out services provide access to the ECS?

Not as far as Optus is aware.

Optus’ view is that:

-

providers of such VoIP-OUT services should obtain either a local telephone

number or LICS number from ACMA for use as CLI; and

-

supply of such VoIP-OUT services without a number issued in accordance with

the Numbering Plan breaches the requirements of the Telecommunications Act

1997, section 462.

There is no exclusion from these requirements on the basis of meeting or not meeting the STS

definition.

If so, what solutions exist and how can they be implemented?;

VSPs should treat VoIP-OUT services in the same manner as 2WAY VoIP services for the

purposes of calls to the ECS. They should identify the CLI of each caller and communicate

the CLI to the ECP. Likewise, they should be required to provide customer name and home

address information into IPND.

(8)

(b) how should these obligations best be expressed in the ECS

Determination; and

(c) are there any other strategies (regulatory or non-regulatory) for

responding to concerns about such services (e.g. provision of

information to end-users) that should be considered as alternatives to

mandating such ECS access?

The ECS Determination should not create uneven regulatory obligations on service providers

competing in the same market. The construction of a “bundle” comprised of a voice out only

service and a voice in only service should not be accepted by the regulatory framework as a

method of avoiding responsibility to provide connectivity to the ECS.

Q18 What criteria should be adopted to determine whether particular CSPs

supplying standard telephone services should have to provide access to

the ECS? What should be used as the basis for assessing

‘unreasonableness’ in making such a decision?

The test of reasonableness will depend upon the CSP’s circumstances.

Optus’ view is that this is a matter of judgment by ACMA on a case by case basis, and that

detailed criteria should not be established in advance of any particular case that the ACMA

considers. Criteria irrelevant to a particular service but assessed by ACMA could provide

grounds for appeal against any ACMA decision. Likewise criteria not assessed by ACMA but

relevant to a particular service could provide grounds for appeal against any ACMA decision.

In broad terms, the issues that ACMA should take account of are:

- Whether it would be technically feasible for the CSP to comply with the requirement?

- Whether it would impose unreasonable financial hardship on the CSP?

The thresholds for basic call access to the ECP should be set high – that is, it should only be

the most exceptional of cases where basic call access is not provided on the basis of

“unreasonableness”.

The threshold for additional capabilities or information, such as current location, should be set

lower, and evaluated against the overall benefit in having basic call access to the ECS via the

service in question.

Q19 Have CNR ‘55’ calls or RVAs proven effective strategies to reduce the

volume of non-emergency calls to the ECS?

Yes definitely.

The ECP has provided statistics that indicate that call volumes reaching the ECP prior to the

introduction of the 55 RVA were in excess of 500,000 per year and since the introduction of

the ‘55’ RVA they have dropped to 240,000 per year. However there are still approximately

16,000 CNR calls being delivered to Police every year.

(9)

An option to consider further is whether the 55 RVA can be implemented in each access

service provider’s network. Then calls would not tie up voice links to the ECP, thereby

enabling legitimate callers greater access to the ECP via their available circuits.

Q21 Have these strategies caused any unintended consequences?

A very small delay in response times from Police may have resulted from the process but this

is more closely related to the fact that the caller is unable to communicate with the ECP

operator. All ‘55’ RVA calls that re-enter the ECP queue, are delivered to Police for

follow-up action. Please note that not all Police forces will attend.

ACMA should take action to inform deaf callers of the importance of pressing ‘55’ if they are

calling 000 and relying on a follow up visit from Police. Alternatively, ACMA should

consider the practicality of a CNR regime for deaf people, associated with 106.

Q22 What alternatives are available?

None known.

Q23 What other measures, besides blocking calls without a USIN, might be

implemented to reduce the incidence of non-genuine calls to the ECS?

(a) Blocking of calls to the ECS where the equipment used to deliver the call has been

associated with non-genuine calls to the ECS in the recent past. For example, switching

mobile calls via the mobile operator’s Equipment Identity Register (EIR) could result in the

blocking of calls to the ECS from mobile handsets that have a history of making nuisance

calls to an ESO.

(b) Charging for calls made to the ECS where the number of non-genuine calls to the ECS in

a month exceeds a reasonable threshold.

(c) Blocking calls to the ECS where the service involved has a demonstrated history of

making non-genuine calls.

Q24 What specific protection measures should be implemented to manage

the increased likelihood of hoax/malicious calls through VoIP and other

NGNs to the ECS? Should specific measures be implemented for CSPs

and/or for ECPs?

VSPs should be engaged by ACMA to participate in a CA forum designed to address these

concerns as only the VSPs will be able to offer suggestions in regards to this complex issue.

Service providers must be enabled to take effective action to protect the integrity of the ECS

in circumstances where interconnected networks or individual services are generating

excessive non-genuine calls.

Q25 What options exist to enable reliable and consistent access to genuine

calls that originate from inside Australia but are relayed through

international gateways? Which option is preferred and how should it

best be implemented?

(10)

In general, calls from any international origin, including VoIP services, are blocked at the

Australian international gateways from calling Australian emergency numbers and this

approach is consistent with the policy outlined in ACMA’s paper. However, as stated in

ACMA’s paper, off shore VSPs and the VoIP-OUT services present challenges to the ECS

Determination, especially as VoIP usage increases and customers start to expect that calls to

emergency services via Australian international gateways are fully supported.

VoIP-OUT services from proxy servers located overseas may result in calls to emergency

services being barred in the Optus international gateways. Even if Optus allowed the call case,

the caller’s origin and location may be the next problem. The call may not be provided with a

CLI, and there may be no information within IPND even if a CLI is provided.

There will be complex issues to resolve that enable genuine calls to the ECP to be made from

Australian customers, but at the same time, to prevent the ECP from exposure to additional

non-genuine calls that cannot be tracked back to the originators.

In the satellite call scenario, it may be possible to determine the caller’s location is within

Australia and only on-forward those emergency calls. Details of such arrangements should be

left to the service provider and the satellite provider to determine, rather than be specified in

the ECS Determination, as the ECS Determination cannot anticipate all of the technology

options that may arise. Access to the ECP in remote locations is seen to be more important

than alignment with fixed network parameters.

If GPS location information is available with calls, the ESOs must be involved in defining

how that GPS information can be conveyed to them. Action by service providers cannot be

initiated without a corresponding commitment from ESOs to upgrade their systems to accept

GPS information.

Q26 What alternatives or technical solutions exist, and which is preferred?

Please see response to related Q.25 in this regard.

Q27 Is it feasible to focus on whether an emergency caller’s location is

known or unknown, instead of using service type definitions? If so,

how?

Service-type definitions are unworkable due to the ongoing merging of technologies and

vendor creativity designed to maximise the usefulness of a telecommunications device to

customers. For example, VoIP/PMTS, VoIP/Satellite, Satellite/PMTS combinations are

expected to become available in the short to medium term.

ACMA runs the risk of the ECS Determination being overtaken by technology and service

developments if it continues to specify obligations on a per service basis. With its current

service specific focus, the ECS Determination is incapable now of preventing some providers

from constructing services (eg as “outgoing only”) to avoid incurring any obligation to

provide access to the ECS.

Q28 Should a definition be developed in the Determination for ‘residential

customer with single-line service’? If so, what should it include/exclude?

(11)

Section 23 is becoming increasingly irrelevant as VoIP services with the ability for remote

access are available to residential customers. Section 23 should be deleted and Section 24

reworked to be applicable across residential and business services.

Q29 Should the service type definitions be reflected differently (e.g.

modified)? If so, how should they be improved?

Please see response to related Q.27 and Q.28 in this regard.

Also, with the advent of smart Softswitches such as Nortel CS2K with capability to handle

both TDM & IP telephony calls originating from geographic numbers, it will become

increasingly difficult (if not impossible) to differentiate the calls as per the current “Fixed

Local Services” and “LICS” service type definitions in the ECS Determination.

Therefore, it would be preferable to have only one common service type definition going

forward for such calls.

For example, this could be the “LICS” service type definition with the 98X location indicator

(as per ACIF G557) - complemented by the removal of the “Fixed” service type definition

from the ECS Determination and amendment of ACIF G557 for removal of the 99X location

indicator.

Also, ACIF G557 needs to be also amended by CA for consistency with the ECS

Determination as the 98X location indicator is prescribed in ACIF G557 for “Nomadic

Services” whereas the ECS Determination only uses the term “LICS” instead of “Nomadic

Services”.

The other service type definitions for PMTS & Satellite Services in the ECS Determination

are working fine and do not need any changes.

Q30 Should they be neutral or service-specific?

Please see responses to related Q.27, Q.28 & Q.29 in this regard.

Q31 Does specifying service types constrain the future relevance of the

Determination?

Q32 Should the LICS definition be reflected differently? If so, how should it

be improved?

Obligations should be defined at a higher level and place the obligation on the service

provider to define how access to the ECS will be provided.

Q33 Does the statement ‘capable of voice telephony’ in the LICS definition

adequately address nomadic-type services such as VoIP?

(12)

Q34 Can the definition of SETS be improved? If so, how? Does the current

definition adequately enforce ECS-related obligations on VSPs?

Q35 What alternatives exist to adequately capture VoIP-based services with

their inherent location identification challenges?

Please see response to related Q.1 in this regard.

Q36 Are there VoIP or other NGN services that should be covered but are

not in the LICS definition? If so, how should this be reflected?

Q37 Should the ECS number 112 be accessible from the fixed-line network

in Australia? If so, how should this best be arranged?

112 should definitely not be promoted to fixed-line customers. Considerable effort has been

expended to provide for handling of calls to 000 for mobile services, including changes to

handsets and SIM cards to promote the direct use of 000 for use on mobile phones.

Promotion of 000 provides a consistent message to customers that minimises confusion about

how to call emergency services.

However, 112 is internationally standardised by ETSI 3GPP as the emergency number for

mobiles and Australia needs to be aligned with international standards and support this

number in mobiles.

Customer dialling on fixed network phones may give rise to calls to 112. The use of wireless

devices in homes along with local services supported on mobile networks can give rise to

inconsistent outcomes. The ECS Determination should enable, but not require, CSPs

providing a local service to carry 112 calls to the ECP.

Q38 What principles should be followed in deciding that a new

communication method (e.g. SMS for the hearing/speech-impaired)

should be incorporated into the ECS arrangements?

ACMA should focus on what services can be enabled, rather than on trying to specify how the

service should operate. The CSP should be able to provide a statement of how a particular

communication method will work with available technology, including typical performance

characteristics and levels of prioritisation that can be provided.

ACMA must make the decision whether the benefit to the community is obtained, based on

the existing characteristics of services. So for example, does SMS access by deaf people

provide a better outcome than no SMS access, given standard SMS services from the

provider?

(13)

Controls over non-genuine calls/messages must also be defined. Imposition of a “free” service

should not be made, where a service was initially introduced without any requirement or

intention for use as an emergency access service, as this may impose considerable additional

costs on service providers.

Q39

Should the ECS Determination be simplified, taking into account the

matters to which ACMA must consider when making a determination in

s. 147(2) of the TCPSS Act?

The ECS Determination should define principles and objectives in terms of outcomes, and

leave detailed processes to be defined elsewhere:

in Industry Guidelines and Codes; and/or

in CSP & VoIP SP (VSP) statements of they meet the ECS principles and objectives.

(for example, via ECS Plans as suggested in the CA submission.)

Q40

Overall, what parts of the Determination work well and why?

The ECS Determination contains definitive and enforceable provisions for the services that it

covers.

Q41

Overall, what part of the Determination are deficient and why?

The ECS Determination is detailed and carriage service specific. It is easily outpaced by

technology and new application services such as VoIP and “smart” construction of services to

avoid obligations.

The ECS Determination should be focussed less on detail of compliance and more on the

outcomes that are required. Focus on detail may be an attempt to eliminate every conceivable

risk. Risk management needs to take account of likelihood of events, cost impacts and lack of

a communications if a particular service does not proceed.

For example, mobile satellite services provide calling capability from locations well beyond

the capabilities of traditional fixed telephone services – but the caller’s exact location may not

be known. The benefits of mobile satellite access to the ECS outweigh the lack of certainty

about the caller’s location.

Obligations on CSPs should be based on reasonable efforts, given the characteristics of the

service and underlying technology.

The ECS Determination is focussed on “loss of a call” at the micro level, but does not

sufficiently address “delays or loss of emergency service” at macro level, due to volume of

hoax, nuisance and non-genuine calls.

Q42

Does the existing Determination constrain the future use of

technologically-feasible options through which ECS access could be provided?

Legislation constrains the ECS Determination to the standard telephone service. The current

ECS Determination assumes that the old TDM-based technology PSTN exists between

telephone customers and Emergency Call Person (ECP).

(14)

Major telephony networks in Australia are less likely to fit that description from 2010

onwards, as VoIP based technologies are used more and more within the core of those

networks.

Being locked into communications based on telephony, the ECS Determination risks being

outdated if multimedia services gain rapid market acceptance in coming years.

An ECS Determination based on principles and objectives may more readily accommodate

new services and provide greater certainty to industry about fundamental obligations.

Q43

How should the obligations in the Determination best be expressed to

cater for emerging technologies?

There are two issues to consider:

1. What telecommunications services should be able to access the ECS? This should be

defined broadly as objectives in the ECS Determination?

2. What objectives for service levels apply? These should be defined by each CSP?

Q44

Should the obligations in section 7 of the Determination be reflected

differently and why? If so, how should they be improved?

Perhaps this section is unnecessary.

The definition of a Carrier is dependent solely upon the ownership and use of line links to

supply telecommunications service to the public. The provision of telephony switching

services and interconnection is a CSP function, not a Carrier function, and obligations should

rest with CSPs.

Q45

differently; in particular, should this section be revised so that its relationship

with section 10 is made clearer? If so, how?

The underlying data service provider may not be aware of the services and applications that

are being carried over the Internet Protocol. Obligations about ECS should be on the VSP,

and not on the underlying data service provider.

Each CSP & VSP providing voice services should document (for example in the CA proposed

‘ECS Plan’) how calls to the ECS will be delivered.

Q46

Should the obligations in sections 9 and 12 of the Determination be

reflected differently; in particular, whether 9(4) and 12(3) should both be

retained?

The ECS Determination should be objectives based and should rely more on the model of

9(4) and 12(3), where the detail is contained in an Industry Code.

Q47

differently? If so, how should they be improved?

(15)

This section is one of the more complex and service specific in the ECS Determination. It

risks becoming even more complex as carriage services evolve and new application services

are introduced.

It should be recast on an equitable basis between Carriers, CSPs & VSPs in terms of

objectives and principles, particularly sub-section (10)(6).

Q48

Should the obligations in sections 12–14 of the Determination be reflected

differently; in particular, are:

Section 13 has the right structure – state the objective.

(a)

subsections 12(2A) and (4) adequate for dealing with their

respective call types; and

Seems overly prescriptive when compared to the impact of nuisance, hoax, malicious and

other non-genuine calls to the ECP.

(b)

the Emergency CNR Guidelines referred to in subsection 10(3)

adequate?

Assume ACMA means section 12(3) in relation to CNR?

Agreed that detail should be in the Guidelines and the Guidelines should be reviewed as

required.

Q49

Why not just rely on standard access provisions of TPA?

Q50

Should the obligations in sections 17–18A of the Determination be

reflected differently; in particular, on whether there are instances where calls to

an ECP:

The ECS Determination is service specific, which implies every time another new service

comes along, the ECS Determination then has to be revised.

The ECS Determination should strive to adopt the technology independent approach of the

Telecommunications Act 1997.

(a)

originate overseas and must be blocked by an Australian gateway;

Agreed this should happen.

(b)

originate in Australia and must be allowed through by an offshore

gateway and subsequent carriers;

Agreed this should happen.

(16)

CSPs and VSPs should carry calls wherever practicable.

CSPs and VSPs should also nominate any circumstances that are not practicable.

(d)

should not be carried for reasons of network security or ECS

integrity?

There is potential for new technologies to disrupt the 000 service.

CSPs & VSPs directly connecting the customers involved, or CSPs acting as transit service

providers of the traffic, must be entitled to apply traffic management controls to limit

potential disruption of the ECS.

Q51

What impediments (technical or practical) are there to Type 4 two-way

VoIP providers in meeting their current obligations under the Determination?

VSPs need to establish gateways. Optus expects that these gateways will be required for

service interworking anyway.

Q52

What impediments exist and what possible obligations should be placed

on Type 2 VoIP Out providers giving access to the ECS?

The current interpretation that these services are not standard telephone services provides a

convenient method for service providers to construct services and avoid obligations to

provide ECS access.

This undermines the ECS Determination process. As described above, Optus’ view is that

CLI should be provided based on a number issued to the customer in accordance with the

Numbering Plan.

Q53

Should the Determination seek to address any deficiencies related to the

national boundary issues? If so, what are these and how should they be

achieved?

The ECS Determination should provide sufficient flexibility for service providers to enable

access for persons located in Australia in any call cases where the emergency call is being

routed by an overseas switch via an Australian international gateway to the ECP and exercise

of reasonable judgement on how to deal with calls from persons located outside of Australia.

Q54

Should the obligations in section 18B of the Determination be reflected

The obligations in 18B (1) should be put in more generic terms so that call types reasonably

judged to be non-genuine emergency calls – nuisance, malicious or negligent calls – can be

treated as per 18B (2).

Q55

differently; in particular, should:

These should be expressed in terms of what can be reasonably achieved by the CSP.

(a)

the performance standards in subsection 20(2) be revised; and

(17)

(b)

reference be made in the ECS Determination that the 106 ECP must adhere to the

performance standards stipulated in the contract between the Commonwealth and the

NRS provider.

Q56

Should quality of service measures be specified in the Determination? If

so, what should they include and how should they be drafted?

Performance is driven to a large degree by non genuine calls. If these were addressed, then

performance would be improved with the current levels of resources.

Rather than just insist on performance standards, ACMA also needs to address the issues of

non genuine calls.

Q57

In section 24A(3), should a provision similar to that provided in

paragraph 24(3) of the Determination be included for services where location is

uncertain? If so, how should this be drafted?

This level of detail should be removed from the ECS Determination and replaced with an

objective i.e. the CSP or VSP to provide location information as practicable, taking into

account Industry Codes and Guidelines.

Q58

Is there a need for technology-specific language? If not, how should the

Determination reflect this?

See above.

Q59

Should the obligations in sections 23–24A of the Determination be

reflected differently? If so, how should they be improved?

The IPND model is derived from an era when relatively few service providers supplied a

limited range of services. IP based services enable people to communicate without necessarily

using numbers from the Numbering Plan.

The multitude of fixed and mobile services also will result in some individuals having

multiple entries in the IPND, but without any individual customer focus within that database.

In the longer term, the IPND model may not be sufficient to capture relevant real time user

information. The current IPND model is not customer focussed – it does not readily link

information about all the services from all the providers that a caller may have. It will not be

apparent to ESOs that a customer can be contacted by alternate means in a ‘caller no

response’ situation.

IPND does not register the particular requirements of customers relevant to communications

with the ESO, for example, that the customer has limited or no hearing capability and specific

handling of a ‘caller no response’ call may be needed.

Customer driven models of information provision should be considered for the long term

consolidation of customer service and address details, based on commonly available Internet

techniques.

(18)

Q60

This level of detail should be in an Industry Guideline.

Q61

This level of detail should be in an Industry Guideline.

Q62

Should the obligations in sections 30–35 of the Determination be reflected

It is understandable that the ESO wants as much information as possible. However, for some

types of calls, eg mobile satellite, a successful call not having all the information is still much

better than no call at all, just because location information cannot be made available.

Again, the problem is with the ECS Determination being too detailed, and thus unable to take

account of the particular circumstances of a service.

Section 36 – no question identified by ACMA.

There is a need to clarify the ECS definition so that repeated non-genuine calls are not

defined as emergency calls, and thus are not required to be supplied free of charge. This will

enable the CSPs & VSPs to charge for repeated non genuine calls as one means of reducing

their occurrence.

Q63

A

41 does not appear to be necessary as ACMA can already request such information

under the Telecommunications Act.

B 42

ditto.

Q64

Should explicit arrangements be included in the Determination to

empower ACMA to request additional relevant information (e.g. emergency call

transcripts or recordings) for investigatory or regulatory purposes? If so, how

should they be drafted and how should privacy considerations be taken into

account?

No- see above.

Q65

The current measures don’t account for non-genuine calls to emergency services – a

significant driver of performance and cost.

There needs to be as much effort put into measures that reduce the incidence of non-genuine

calls as there is into measures of CSP and ECP performance, as the first significantly affects

the second.

(19)

Q66

differently? If so, how should they be improved?

Focus should be on process improvement, not keeping records simply for the sake of having

records.