Network Working Group H. Schulzrinne
Request for Comments: 5012 Columbia U.
Category: Informational R. Marshall, Ed.
TCS
January 2008
Network Working Group H. Schulzrinne
Request for Comments: 5012 Columbia U.
Category: Informational R. Marshall, Ed.
TCS
January 2008
Requirements for Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies
利用互联网技术解决紧急情况的要求
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
本备忘录为互联网社区提供信息。它没有规定任何类型的互联网标准。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Abstract
摘要
This document defines terminology and enumerates requirements for the context resolution of emergency calls placed by the public using voice-over-IP (VoIP) and general Internet multimedia systems, where Internet protocols are used end to end.
本文件定义了术语，并列举了公众使用IP语音（VoIP）和通用互联网多媒体系统拨打的紧急呼叫的上下文解析要求，其中使用了端到端的互联网协议。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Emergency Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Service Providers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.3. Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.4. Call Routing Entities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5. Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.6. Identifiers, Numbers, and Dial Strings . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.7. Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Basic Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. High-Level Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Identifying the Caller's Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Emergency Service Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Mapping Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Emergency Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Service Providers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.3. Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.4. Call Routing Entities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.5. Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.6. Identifiers, Numbers, and Dial Strings . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.7. Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Basic Actors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. High-Level Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Identifying the Caller's Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Emergency Service Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Mapping Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Users of both voice-centric (telephone-like) and non-voice services, such as text communication for hearing-disabled users (see [RFC3351] and [toip]), expect to be able to initiate a request for help in case of an emergency.
以语音为中心（类似电话）和非语音服务的用户，如听力障碍用户的文本通信（参见[RFC3351]和[toip]），都希望能够在紧急情况下发起帮助请求。
Unfortunately, the existing mechanisms to support emergency calls that have evolved within the public circuit-switched telephone network (PSTN) are not appropriate to handle evolving IP-based voice, text, and real-time multimedia communications. This document outlines the key requirements that IP-based end systems and network elements, such as Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] proxies, need to satisfy in order to provide emergency call services, which at a minimum, offer the same functionality as existing PSTN services, with the additional overall goal of making emergency calling more robust, less costly to implement, and multimedia-capable.
不幸的是，在公共电路交换电话网（PSTN）中发展起来的支持紧急呼叫的现有机制不适合处理不断发展的基于IP的语音、文本和实时多媒体通信。本文件概述了基于IP的终端系统和网络元件（如会话启动协议（SIP）[RFC3261]代理）需要满足的关键要求，以便提供紧急呼叫服务，该服务至少提供与现有PSTN服务相同的功能，另外的总体目标是使紧急呼叫更加健壮，实施成本更低，并支持多媒体。
This document only focuses on end-to-end IP-based calls, i.e., where the emergency call originates from an IP end system and terminates in an IP-capable public safety answering point (PSAP), conveyed entirely over an IP network.
本文档仅关注基于IP的端到端呼叫，即紧急呼叫源自IP端系统，并在完全通过IP网络传输的具有IP能力的公共安全应答点（PSAP）中终止。
We first define terminology in Section 3. The document then outlines various functional issues that relate to placing an IP-based emergency call, including a description of baseline requirements (Section 5), identification of the emergency caller's location (Section 6), use of a service identifier to declare a call to be an emergency call (Section 7), and finally, the mapping function required to route the call to the appropriate PSAP (Section 8).
我们首先在第3节中定义术语。然后，该文件概述了与拨打基于IP的紧急呼叫相关的各种功能问题，包括基线要求的描述（第5节）、紧急呼叫方位置的识别（第6节）、使用服务标识符将呼叫声明为紧急呼叫（第7节），最后，将调用路由到相应PSAP所需的映射函数（第8节）。
The primary purpose of the mapping protocol is to produce a PSAP URI drawn from a preferred set of URI schemes such as SIP or SIPS URIs, based on both location information [RFC4119] and a service identifier in order to facilitate the IP end-to-end completion of an emergency call.
映射协议的主要目的是基于位置信息[RFC4119]和服务标识符来产生从诸如SIP或SIPS URI的优选URI方案集合中提取的PSAP URI，以便促进紧急呼叫的IP端到端完成。
Aside from obtaining a PSAP URI, the mapping protocol is useful for obtaining other information as well. There may be a case, for example, where an appropriate emergency number is not known, only the location. The mapping protocol can then return a geographically appropriate emergency number based on the input.
除了获取PSAPURI外，映射协议还可用于获取其他信息。例如，可能存在一种情况，即不知道适当的紧急号码，只知道位置。然后，映射协议可以根据输入返回地理位置合适的紧急号码。
Since some PSAPs may not immediately support IP, or because some user equipment (UE) may not initially support emergency service identifiers, it may be necessary to also support emergency service identifiers that utilize less-preferred URI schemes, such as a tel URI in order to complete an emergency call via the PSTN.
由于一些psap可能不立即支持IP，或者因为一些用户设备（UE）可能最初不支持紧急服务标识符，因此可能还需要支持使用较少优选URI方案的紧急服务标识符，例如tel URI，以便通过PSTN完成紧急呼叫。
Identification of the caller, while not incompatible with the requirements for messaging outlined within this document, is considered to be outside the scope of this document.
呼叫者的识别虽然与本文件中概述的消息传递要求不兼容，但被认为不在本文件的范围之内。
Location is required for two separate purposes: first, to support the routing of the emergency call to the appropriate PSAP and second, to display the caller's location to the call taker to help in dispatching emergency assistance to the appropriate location.
位置需要用于两个不同的目的：第一，支持将紧急呼叫路由到适当的PSAP；第二，向呼叫接受者显示呼叫者的位置，以帮助将紧急援助发送到适当的位置。
This latter use, the display of location information to the PSAP, is orthogonal to the mapping protocol, and is outside the scope of this document.
后一种用途，即向PSAP显示位置信息，与映射协议正交，不在本文档范围内。
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119], with the important qualification that, unless otherwise stated, these terms apply to the design of the mapping protocol, not its implementation or application.
本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“要求”、“应”、“不得”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照RFC 2119[RFC2119]中的描述进行解释，重要的限定条件是，除非另有说明，否则这些术语适用于映射协议的设计，不是它的实现或应用。
Basic emergency service: Basic emergency service allows a caller to reach a PSAP serving its current location, but the PSAP may not be able to determine the identity or geographic location of the caller, except by the call taker asking the caller.
基本紧急服务：基本紧急服务允许呼叫者到达服务于其当前位置的PSAP，但PSAP可能无法确定呼叫者的身份或地理位置，除非呼叫者询问呼叫者。
Enhanced emergency service: In enhanced emergency service, the PSAP call taker can determine the caller's current location.
增强型紧急服务：在增强型紧急服务中，PSAP呼叫接受者可以确定呼叫者的当前位置。
Internet Access Provider (IAP): An organization that provides physical and data link (layer 2) network connectivity to its customers or users, e.g., through digital subscriber lines, cable TV plants, Ethernet, leased lines, or radio frequencies. Examples of such organizations include telecommunication carriers,
互联网接入提供商（IAP）：向其客户或用户提供物理和数据链路（第2层）网络连接的组织，例如通过数字用户线路、有线电视设备、以太网、租用线路或无线电频率。这类组织的例子包括电信运营商，
municipal utilities, larger enterprises with their own network infrastructure, and government organizations, such as the military.
市政公用事业、拥有自己网络基础设施的大型企业和政府机构，如军队。
Internet Service Provider (ISP): An organization that provides IP network-layer services to its customers or users. This entity may or may not provide the physical-layer and data link (layer-2) connectivity, such as fiber or Ethernet, i.e., it may or may not play the role of an IAP.
Internet服务提供商（ISP）：为其客户或用户提供IP网络层服务的组织。该实体可能提供也可能不提供物理层和数据链路（第2层）连接，如光纤或以太网，即，它可能扮演也可能不扮演IAP的角色。
Application Service Provider (ASP): The organization or entity that provides application-layer services, which may include voice (see "Voice Service Provider"). This entity can be a private individual, an enterprise, a government, or a service provider. An ASP is more general than a Voice Service Provider, since emergency calls may use other media beyond voice, including text and video. For a particular user, the ASP may or may not be the same organization as his IAP or ISP.
应用程序服务提供商（ASP）：提供应用程序层服务的组织或实体，其中可能包括语音（请参阅“语音服务提供商”）。该实体可以是个人、企业、政府或服务提供商。ASP比语音服务提供商更通用，因为紧急呼叫可能使用语音以外的其他媒体，包括文本和视频。对于特定用户，ASP可能是也可能不是与其IAP或ISP相同的组织。
Voice Service Provider (VSP): A specific type of Application Service Provider that provides voice related services based on IP, such as call routing, a SIP URI, or PSTN termination. In this document, unless noted otherwise, any reference to "Voice Service Provider" or "VSP" may be used interchangeably with "Application/Voice Service Provider" or "ASP/VSP".
语音服务提供商（VSP）：一种特定类型的应用程序服务提供商，提供基于IP的语音相关服务，如呼叫路由、SIP URI或PSTN终端。在本文件中，除非另有说明，否则对“语音服务提供商”或“VSP”的任何引用可与“应用程序/语音服务提供商”或“ASP/VSP”互换使用。
(Emergency) caller: The term "caller" or "emergency caller" refers to the person placing an emergency call or sending an emergency instant message (IM).
（紧急）呼叫者：术语“呼叫者”或“紧急呼叫者”指拨打紧急电话或发送紧急即时消息（IM）的人。
User Equipment (UE): User equipment is the device or software operated by the caller to place an emergency call. A SIP user agent (UA) is an example of user equipment.
用户设备（UE）：用户设备是由呼叫者操作以拨打紧急呼叫的设备或软件。SIP用户代理（UA）是用户设备的示例。
Call taker: A call taker is an agent at the PSAP that accepts calls and may dispatch emergency help. Sometimes the functions of call taking and dispatching are handled by different groups of people, but these divisions of labor are not generally visible to the caller and thus do not concern us here.
呼叫接受者：呼叫接受者是PSAP的代理，接受呼叫并可能派遣紧急帮助。有时，接听和调度电话的功能由不同的人群处理，但这些分工对来电者来说通常是不可见的，因此我们在此不关心。
Emergency Service Routing Proxy (ESRP): An ESRP is an emergency call routing support entity that invokes the location-to-PSAP URI mapping function, to return an appropriate PSAP URI, or the URI for another ESRP. Client mapping requests could also be performed by a number of entities, including entities that instantiate the SIP proxy role and the SIP user agent client role.
紧急服务路由代理（ESRP）：ESRP是一个紧急呼叫路由支持实体，它调用location to PSAP URI映射函数，以返回适当的PSAP URI或其他ESRP的URI。客户端映射请求也可以由许多实体执行，包括实例化SIP代理角色和SIP用户代理客户端角色的实体。
Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP): A PSAP is a facility where emergency calls are received under the responsibility of a public authority. (This terminology is used by both the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), in ETSI SR 002 180, and the National Emergency Number Association (NENA).) In the United Kingdom, PSAPs are called Operator Assistance Centres; in New Zealand, Communications Centres. Within this document, it is assumed, unless stated otherwise, that PSAPs support the receipt of emergency calls over IP, using appropriate application layer protocols, such as SIP for call signaling and RTP for media.
公共安全应答点（PSAP）：公共安全应答点是公共当局负责接收紧急呼叫的设施。（欧洲电信标准协会（ETSI）（ETSI SR 002 180）和英国国家紧急号码协会（NENA）均使用该术语。在英国，PSAP称为运营商援助中心；在新西兰，有通讯中心。在本文档中，除非另有说明，否则假定PSAP支持通过IP接收紧急呼叫，使用适当的应用层协议，如SIP用于呼叫信令，RTP用于媒体。
Location: A geographic identification assigned to a region or feature based on a specific coordinate system, or by other precise information such as a street number and name. It can be either a civic or geographic location.
位置：基于特定坐标系或其他精确信息（如街道编号和名称）指定给区域或特征的地理标识。它可以是城市或地理位置。
Civic location: A described location based on some reference system, such as jurisdictional region or postal delivery grid. A street address is a common example of a civic location.
城市位置：基于某些参考系统的描述位置，如管辖区域或邮政递送网格。街道地址是城市位置的常见示例。
Geographic location: A reference to a point that is able to be located, as described by a set of defined coordinates within a geographic coordinate system, such as latitude and longitude within the WGS-84 datum. For example, a 2-D geographic location is defined as an (x,y) coordinate value pair according to the distance north or south of the equator and east or west of the prime meridian.
地理位置：能够定位的点的参考，如地理坐标系内一组定义的坐标所述，如WGS-84基准内的纬度和经度。例如，二维地理位置定义为（x，y）坐标值对，根据赤道以北或以南以及本初子午线以东或以西的距离。
Location validation: A caller location is considered valid if the civic or geographic location is recognizable within an acceptable location reference system (e.g., United States Postal Address or the WGS-84 datum) and can be mapped to one or more PSAPs. While it is desirable to determine that a location exists, validation may not ensure that such a location exists, but rather may only
位置验证：如果市民或地理位置在可接受的位置参考系统（例如，美国邮政地址或WGS-84基准）内可识别，并且可以映射到一个或多个PSAP，则呼叫方位置被视为有效。虽然需要确定某个位置是否存在，但验证可能无法确保该位置存在，而可能仅限于
ensure that the location falls within some range of known values. Location validation ensures that a location is able to be referenced for mapping, but makes no assumption about the association between the caller and the caller's location.
确保位置在已知值的某个范围内。位置验证确保可以引用位置进行映射，但不假设调用方和调用方位置之间的关联。
(Emergency) service number: The (emergency) service number is a string of digits used to reach the (emergency) service. The emergency service number is often just called the emergency number. It is the number typically dialed on devices directly connected to the PSTN and the number reserved for emergency calls by national or regional numbering authorities. It only contains the digits 0 through 9, #, and *. The service number may depend on the location of the caller. For example, the general emergency service number in the United States is 911 and the poison control service number is 18002221222. In most cases, the service number and dial string are the same; they may differ in some private phone networks. A service number may be carried in tel URLs [RFC3966], along with a context identifier. In the North American numbering plan, some service numbers are three-digit N11 or service codes, but not all emergency numbers have three digits. A caller may have to dial a service dial string (below) that differs from the service number when using a PBX.
（紧急）服务号码：（紧急）服务号码是用于到达（紧急）服务的一串数字。紧急服务号码通常被称为紧急号码。它是通常在直接连接到PSTN的设备上拨打的号码，也是国家或地区编号机构为紧急呼叫保留的号码。它只包含数字0到9、#和*。服务号码可能取决于呼叫者的位置。例如，美国的一般紧急服务号码是911，毒物控制服务号码是1800222222。在大多数情况下，服务号码和拨号串是相同的；在某些专用电话网络中，它们可能有所不同。服务编号可以与上下文标识符一起包含在tel URL[RFC3966]中。在北美编号计划中，一些服务编号为三位数N11或服务代码，但并非所有紧急编号都有三位数。使用PBX时，呼叫者可能必须拨打与服务号码不同的服务拨号字符串（如下）。
(Emergency) service dial string: The service dial string identifies the string of digits that a caller must dial to reach a particular (emergency) service. In devices directly connected to the PSTN, the service dial string is the same as the service number and may thus depend on the location of the caller. However, in private phone networks, such as in PBXs, the service dial string consists of a dialing prefix to reach an outside line, followed by the emergency number. For example, in a hotel, the dial string for emergency services in the United States might be 9911. Dial strings may contain indications of pauses or wait-for-secondary-dial-tone indications. Service dial strings are outside the scope of this document.
（紧急）服务拨号字符串：服务拨号字符串标识呼叫者必须拨打的数字字符串，以达到特定（紧急）服务。在直接连接到PSTN的设备中，服务拨号字符串与服务号码相同，因此可能取决于呼叫者的位置。然而，在专用电话网络中，例如在PBX中，服务拨号字符串由一个拨号前缀组成，该前缀用于到达外线，后跟紧急号码。例如，在一家酒店，美国紧急服务的拨号字符串可能是9911。拨号串可能包含暂停指示或等待辅助拨号音指示。服务拨号字符串不在本文档的范围内。
(Emergency) service identifier: The (emergency) service identifier describes the emergency service, independent of the user interface mechanism, the signaling protocol that is used to reach the service, or the caller's geographic location. It is a protocol constant and used within the mapping and signaling protocols. An example is the service URN [RFC5031].
（紧急）服务标识符：（紧急）服务标识符描述紧急服务，独立于用户接口机制、用于到达服务的信令协议或呼叫者的地理位置。它是一个协议常量，在映射和信令协议中使用。服务URN[RFC5031]就是一个例子。
(Emergency) service URL: The service URL is a protocol-specific (e.g., SIP) or protocol-agnostic (e.g., im: [RFC3860]) identifier that contains the address of the PSAP or other emergency service. It depends on the specific signaling or data transport protocol used to reach the emergency service.
（紧急）服务URL：服务URL是协议特定（例如SIP）或协议无关（例如im:[RFC3860]）标识符，其中包含PSAP或其他紧急服务的地址。这取决于用于到达紧急服务的特定信令或数据传输协议。
Service URN: A service URN is an implementation of a service identifier, which can be applied to both emergency and non-emergency contexts, e.g., urn:service:sos or urn:service:counseling. Within this document, service URNs are referred to as 'emergency service URNs' [RFC5031].
服务URN：服务URN是服务标识符的实现，可应用于紧急和非紧急上下文，例如URN:Service:sos或URN:Service:consultation。在本文件中，服务URN称为“紧急服务URN”[RFC5031]。
Home emergency number: A home emergency number is the emergency number valid at the caller's customary home location, e.g., his permanent residence. The home location may or may not coincide with the service area of the caller's VSP.
家庭紧急电话号码：家庭紧急电话号码是在呼叫者惯常的家庭地点有效的紧急电话号码，例如，他的永久居住地。归属位置可能与呼叫者的VSP的服务区域重合，也可能不重合。
Home emergency dial string: A home dial string is the dial string valid at the caller's customary home location, e.g., his permanent residence.
家庭紧急拨号串：家庭拨号串是在呼叫者惯常的家庭位置（例如，他的永久居住地）有效的拨号串。
Visited emergency number: A visited emergency number is the emergency number valid at the caller's current physical location. We distinguish the visited emergency number if the caller is traveling outside his home region.
已访问紧急电话号码：已访问紧急电话号码是在呼叫者当前物理位置有效的紧急电话号码。如果呼叫者在其家乡地区以外旅行，我们会区分访问的紧急电话号码。
Visited emergency dial string: A visited emergency dial string is the dial string number valid at the caller's current physical location.
已访问的紧急拨号字符串：已访问的紧急拨号字符串是在呼叫方当前物理位置有效的拨号字符串号码。
Mapping: Mapping is the process of resolving a location to one or more PSAP URIs that directly identify a PSAP, or point to an intermediary that knows about a PSAP and that is designated as responsible for serving that location.
映射：映射是将一个位置解析为一个或多个PSAP URI的过程，这些URI直接标识PSAP，或指向了解PSAP并被指定为负责服务该位置的中介。
Mapping client: A mapping client interacts with the mapping server to learn one or more PSAP URIs for a given location.
映射客户端：映射客户端与映射服务器交互，以了解给定位置的一个或多个PSAPURI。
Mapping protocol: A protocol used to convey the mapping request and response.
映射协议：用于传递映射请求和响应的协议。
Mapping server: The mapping server holds information about the location-to-PSAP URI mapping.
映射服务器：映射服务器保存关于位置到PSAP URI映射的信息。
Mapping service: A network service that uses a distributed mapping protocol to perform a mapping between a location and a PSAP, or intermediary that knows about the PSAP, and is used to assist in routing an emergency call.
映射服务：一种网络服务，它使用分布式映射协议在位置和PSAP或了解PSAP的中介之间执行映射，并用于帮助路由紧急呼叫。
In order to support emergency services covering a large physical area, various infrastructure elements are necessary, including Internet Access Providers (IAPs), Application/Voice Service Providers (ASP/VSPs), Emergency Service Routing Proxy (ESRP) providers, mapping service providers, and PSAPs.
为了支持覆盖大面积物理区域的紧急服务，需要各种基础设施要素，包括Internet访问提供商（IAP）、应用程序/语音服务提供商（ASP/VSP）、紧急服务路由代理（ESRP）提供商、映射服务提供商和PSAP。
This section outlines which entities will be considered in the routing scenarios discussed.
本节概述了将在所讨论的路由方案中考虑哪些实体。
Location
Information +-----------------+
|(1) |Internet | +-----------+
v |Access | | |
+-----------+ |Provider | | Mapping |
| | | (3) | | Service |
| Emergency |<---+-----------------+-->| |
| Caller | | (2) | +-----------+
| |<---+-------+ | ^
+-----------+ | +----|---------+------+ |
^ | | Location | | |
| | | Information<-+ | |
| +--+--------------+ |(5) | | (6)
| | | | |
| | +-----------v+ | |
| (4) | | | | |
+--------------+--->| ESRP |<--+---+
| | | | |
| | +------------+ |
| | ^ |
| | (7) | | +----+--+
| (8) | +------------>| |
+--------------+----------------------->| PSAP |
| | | |
|Application/ | +----+--+
|Voice |
|Service |
|Provider |
+---------------------+
Location
Information +-----------------+
|(1) |Internet | +-----------+
v |Access | | |
+-----------+ |Provider | | Mapping |
| | | (3) | | Service |
| Emergency |<---+-----------------+-->| |
| Caller | | (2) | +-----------+
| |<---+-------+ | ^
+-----------+ | +----|---------+------+ |
^ | | Location | | |
| | | Information<-+ | |
| +--+--------------+ |(5) | | (6)
| | | | |
| | +-----------v+ | |
| (4) | | | | |
+--------------+--->| ESRP |<--+---+
| | | | |
| | +------------+ |
| | ^ |
| | (7) | | +----+--+
| (8) | +------------>| |
+--------------+----------------------->| PSAP |
| | | |
|Application/ | +----+--+
|Voice |
|Service |
|Provider |
+---------------------+
Figure 1: Framework for Emergency Call Routing
图1：紧急呼叫路由框架
Figure 1 shows the interaction between the entities involved in the call. There are a number of different deployment choices, as can be easily seen from the figure.
图1显示了调用中涉及的实体之间的交互。从图中可以很容易地看出，有许多不同的部署选择。
Is the Internet Access Provider also the Application/Voice Service Provider? In the Internet today, the roles of Internet access provider and application/voice service provider are typically provided by different entities. As a consequence, the Application/ Voice Service Provider is typically not able to directly determine the physical location of the emergency caller.
互联网接入提供商是否也是应用程序/语音服务提供商？在当今的互联网中，互联网接入提供商和应用程序/语音服务提供商的角色通常由不同的实体提供。因此，应用程序/语音服务提供商通常无法直接确定紧急呼叫者的物理位置。
The overlapping squares in the figure indicate that some functions can be collapsed into a single entity. As an example, the Application/Voice Service Provider might be the same entity as the Internet Access Provider. There is, however, no requirement that this must be the case. Additionally, we consider that end systems might act as their own ASP/VSP, e.g., either for enterprises or for residential users.
图中重叠的正方形表示某些函数可以折叠为单个实体。例如，应用程序/语音服务提供商可能是与互联网接入提供商相同的实体。然而，没有规定必须如此。此外，我们认为，终端系统可以充当他们自己的ASP/VSP，例如，为企业或住宅用户。
Various potential interactions between the entities depicted in Figure 1 are described below:
图1所示实体之间的各种潜在交互如下所述：
1. Location information might be available to the end host itself.
1. 位置信息可能对终端主机本身可用。
2. Location information might, however, also be obtained from the Internet Access Provider.
2. 但是，也可以从互联网接入提供商处获得位置信息。
3. The emergency caller might need to consult a mapping service to determine the PSAP (or other relevant information) that is appropriate for the physical location of the emergency caller, possibly considering other attributes, such as appropriate language support by the emergency call taker.
3. 紧急呼叫者可能需要咨询映射服务，以确定适合紧急呼叫者物理位置的PSAP（或其他相关信息），可能需要考虑其他属性，例如紧急呼叫者提供的适当语言支持。
4. The emergency caller might get assistance for emergency call routing by infrastructure elements that are emergency call routing support entities, such as an Emergency Service Routing Proxy (ESRP) in SIP.
4. 紧急呼叫方可以通过作为紧急呼叫路由支持实体的基础结构元素（如SIP中的紧急服务路由代理（ESRP））获得紧急呼叫路由的帮助。
5. Location information is used by emergency call routing support entities for subsequent mapping requests.
5. 位置信息由紧急呼叫路由支持实体用于后续映射请求。
6. Emergency call routing support entities might need to consult a mapping service to determine where to route the emergency call.
6. 紧急呼叫路由支持实体可能需要咨询映射服务，以确定将紧急呼叫路由到何处。
7. For infrastructure-based emergency call routing (in contrast to UE-based emergency call routing), the emergency call routing support entity needs to forward the call to the PSAP.
7. 对于基于基础设施的紧急呼叫路由（与基于UE的紧急呼叫路由相反），紧急呼叫路由支持实体需要将呼叫转发到PSAP。
8. The emergency caller may interact directly with the PSAP, where the UE invokes mapping, and initiates a connection, without relying on any intermediary emergency call routing support entities.
8. 紧急呼叫方可以直接与PSAP交互，其中UE调用映射并发起连接，而不依赖任何中间紧急呼叫路由支持实体。
Below, we summarize high-level architectural requirements that guide some of the component requirements detailed later in the document.
下面，我们总结了高级体系结构需求，这些需求指导了本文档后面详述的一些组件需求。
Re1. Application/Voice service provider existence: The initiation of an IP-based emergency call SHOULD NOT assume the existence of an Application/Voice Service Provider (ASP/VSP).
Re1。存在应用程序/语音服务提供商：启动基于IP的紧急呼叫不应假定存在应用程序/语音服务提供商（ASP/VSP）。
Motivation: The caller may not have an application/voice service provider. For example, a residence may have its own DNS domain and run its own SIP proxy server for that domain. On a larger scale, a university might provide voice services to its students and staff, but might not be a telecommunication provider.
动机：呼叫方可能没有应用程序/语音服务提供商。例如，住宅可能有自己的DNS域，并为该域运行自己的SIP代理服务器。在更大范围内，一所大学可能为其学生和教职员工提供语音服务，但可能不是电信提供商。
Re2. International applicability: Regional, political, and organizational aspects MUST be considered during the design of protocols and protocol extensions that support IP-based emergency calls.
Re2。国际适用性：在设计支持基于IP的紧急呼叫的协议和协议扩展时，必须考虑区域、政治和组织方面。
Motivation: It must be possible for a device or software developed or purchased in one country to place emergency calls in another country. System components should not be biased towards a particular set of emergency numbers or languages. Also, different countries have evolved different ways of organizing emergency services, e.g., either centralizing them or having smaller regional subdivisions, such as the United States or municipalities, handle emergency calls within their jurisdiction.
动机：在一个国家开发或购买的设备或软件必须能够在另一个国家拨打紧急电话。系统组件不应偏向于一组特定的紧急号码或语言。此外，不同的国家发展了不同的应急服务组织方式，例如，将应急服务集中起来，或者让更小的地区分支机构（如美国或各市）在其管辖范围内处理紧急呼叫。
Re3. Distributed administration: Deployment of IP-based emergency services MUST NOT depend on a single central administrative authority.
Re3。分布式管理：基于IP的应急服务的部署不得依赖于单一的中央管理机构。
Motivation: The design of the mapping protocol must make it possible to deploy and administer emergency calling features on a regional or national basis without requiring coordination with other regions or nations. The system cannot assume, for example, that there is a single global entity issuing certificates for PSAPs, ASP/VSPs, IAPs, or other participants.
动机：映射协议的设计必须能够在区域或国家基础上部署和管理紧急呼叫功能，而无需与其他区域或国家进行协调。例如，系统不能假设有一个全局实体为PSAP、ASP/VSPs、IAPs或其他参与者颁发证书。
Re4. Multi-mode communication: IP-based emergency calls MUST support multiple communication modes, including, for example, audio, video, and text.
Re4。多模式通信：基于IP的紧急呼叫必须支持多种通信模式，例如音频、视频和文本。
Motivation: Within the PSTN, voice and text telephony (often called TTY or text-phone in North America) are the only commonly supported media. Emergency calling must support a variety of media. Such media should include voice, conversational text (RFC 4103 [RFC4103]), instant messaging, and video.
动机：在PSTN中，语音和文本电话（在北美通常称为TTY或文本电话）是唯一普遍支持的媒体。紧急呼叫必须支持多种媒体。此类媒体应包括语音、对话文本（RFC 4103[RFC4103]）、即时消息和视频。
Re5. Mapping result usability: The mapping protocol MUST return one or more URIs that are usable within a standard signaling protocol (i.e., without special emergency extensions).
Re5。映射结果可用性：映射协议必须返回标准信令协议中可用的一个或多个URI（即，没有特殊的紧急扩展）。
Motivation: For example, a SIP URI that is returned by the mapping protocol needs to be usable by any SIP-capable phone within a SIP-initiated emergency call. This is in contrast to a "special purpose" URI, which may not be recognizable by a legacy SIP device.
动机：例如，映射协议返回的SIPURI需要在SIP发起的紧急呼叫中由任何支持SIP的电话使用。这与传统SIP设备可能无法识别的“特殊用途”URI形成对比。
Re6. PSAP URI accessibility: The mapping protocol MUST support interaction between the client and server where no enrollment to a mapping service exists or is required.
Re6。PSAP URI可访问性：映射协议必须支持不存在或不需要注册映射服务的客户端和服务器之间的交互。
Motivation: The mapping server may well be operated by a service provider, but access to the server offering the mapping must not require use of a specific ISP or ASP/VSP.
动机：映射服务器很可能由服务提供商操作，但是访问提供映射的服务器不需要使用特定的ISP或ASP/VSP。
Re7. Common data structures and formats: The mapping protocol SHOULD support common formats (e.g., PIDF-LO) for location data.
Re7。通用数据结构和格式：映射协议应支持位置数据的通用格式（如PIDF-LO）。
Motivation: Location databases should not need to be transformed or modified in any unusual or unreasonable way in order for the mapping protocol to use the data. For example, a database that contains civic addresses used by location servers may be used for multiple purposes and applications beyond emergency service location-to-PSAP URI mapping.
动机：为了让映射协议使用数据，不需要以任何异常或不合理的方式转换或修改位置数据库。例如，包含位置服务器使用的civic地址的数据库可以用于紧急服务位置到psapuri映射之外的多种用途和应用程序。
Re8. Anonymous mapping: The mapping protocol MUST NOT require the true identity of the target for which the location information is attributed.
Re8。匿名映射：映射协议不得要求位置信息所属目标的真实身份。
Motivation: Ideally, no identity information is provided via the mapping protocol. Where identity information is provided, it may be in the form of an unlinked pseudonym (RFC 3693 [RFC3693]).
动机：理想情况下，不通过映射协议提供身份信息。在提供身份信息的情况下，可以采用未链接的笔名形式（RFC 3693[RFC3693]）。
Location can either be provided directly (by value), or via a pointer (by reference), and represents either a civic location, or a geographic location. An important question is how and when to attach location information to the VoIP emergency signaling messages. In general, we can distinguish three modes of operation of how a location is associated with an emergency call:
位置可以直接（通过值）提供，也可以通过指针（通过引用）提供，并表示城市位置或地理位置。一个重要的问题是如何以及何时将位置信息附加到VoIP紧急信令消息。一般来说，我们可以区分三种操作模式，即位置如何与紧急呼叫相关联：
UA-inserted: The caller's user agent inserts the location information into the call-signaling message.
UA inserted：呼叫者的用户代理将位置信息插入到呼叫信令消息中。
UA-referenced: The caller's user agent provides a pointer (i.e., a location reference), via a permanent or temporary identifier, to the location information, which is stored by a location server somewhere else and then retrieved by the PSAP, ESRP, or other authorized entity.
UA引用：调用方的用户代理通过永久或临时标识符提供指向位置信息的指针（即位置引用），位置信息由位置服务器存储在其他地方，然后由PSAP、ESRP或其他授权实体检索。
Proxy-inserted: A proxy along the call path inserts the location or location reference.
插入的代理：沿调用路径的代理插入位置或位置引用。
The following requirements apply:
以下要求适用：
Lo1. Reference datum: The mapping protocol MUST support the WGS-84 coordinate reference system and MAY support other coordinate reference systems.
Lo1。参考基准：测绘协议必须支持WGS-84坐标参考系统，并可能支持其他坐标参考系统。
Motivation: Though many different datums exist around the world, this document recommends the WGS-84 datum since it is designed to describe the whole earth, rather than a single continent or other region, and is commonly used to represent Global Positioning System coordinates.
动机：尽管世界各地存在许多不同的基准，但本文件建议使用WGS-84基准，因为它旨在描述整个地球，而不是单个大陆或其他区域，并且通常用于表示全球定位系统坐标。
Lo2. Location delivery by-value: The mapping protocol MUST support the delivery of location information using a by-value method, though it MAY also support de-referencing a URL that references a location object.
Lo2。按值传递位置：映射协议必须支持使用按值方法传递位置信息，尽管它也可能支持取消引用引用位置对象的URL。
Motivation: The mapping protocol is not required to support the ability to de-reference specific location references.
动机：映射协议不需要支持取消引用特定位置引用的能力。
Lo3. Alternate community names: The mapping protocol MUST support both the jurisdictional community name and the postal community name fields within the PIDF-LO [RFC4119] data.
Lo3。备用社区名称：映射协议必须支持PIDF-LO[RFC4119]数据中的辖区社区名称和邮政社区名称字段。
Motivation: The mapping protocol must accept queries with either a postal or jurisdictional community name field, or both, and provide appropriate responses. If a mapping query contains only one community name and the database contains both jurisdictional and postal community names, the mapping protocol response SHOULD return both community names.
动机：映射协议必须接受带有邮政或辖区社区名称字段的查询，或者两者都接受，并提供适当的响应。如果映射查询仅包含一个社区名称，而数据库同时包含辖区和邮政社区名称，则映射协议响应应返回两个社区名称。
Lo4. Validation of civic location: The mapping protocol MUST be able to report the results of validating civic locations (street addresses).
Lo4。城市位置验证：映射协议必须能够报告城市位置（街道地址）验证的结果。
Motivation: Location validation provides an opportunity to help ascertain ahead of time whether or not a successful mapping to the appropriate PSAP will likely occur when it is required. Validation may also help to avoid delays during emergency call setup due to invalid location data.
动机：位置验证提供了一个机会，帮助提前确定在需要时是否可能成功映射到适当的PSAP。验证也有助于避免因位置数据无效而导致紧急呼叫设置过程中的延迟。
Lo5. Information about location data used for mapping: The mapping protocol MUST support the ability to provide ancillary information about the resolution of location data used to retrieve a PSAP URI.
Lo5。有关用于映射的位置数据的信息：映射协议必须支持提供有关用于检索PSAP URI的位置数据的解析的辅助信息。
Motivation: The mapping server may not use all the data elements in the provided location information to determine a match, or may be able to find a match based on all of the information except for some specific data elements. The uniqueness of this information set may be used to differentiate among emergency jurisdictions. Precision or resolution in the context of this requirement might mean, for example, explicit identification of the data elements that were used successfully in the mapping.
动机：映射服务器可能不会使用提供的位置信息中的所有数据元素来确定匹配，或者可能能够基于除某些特定数据元素之外的所有信息找到匹配。该信息集的唯一性可用于区分不同的紧急管辖区。例如，此要求中的精度或分辨率可能意味着明确标识映射中成功使用的数据元素。
Lo6. Contact for location problems: The mapping protocol MUST support a mechanism to contact an appropriate authority to resolve mapping-related issues for the queried location. For example, the querier may want to report problems with the response values or indicate that the mapping database is mistaken on declaring a civic location as non-existent.
Lo6。位置问题联系人：映射协议必须支持一种机制来联系适当的机构，以解决查询位置的映射相关问题。例如，查询者可能希望报告响应值的问题，或者指出映射数据库错误地将civic位置声明为不存在。
Motivation: Initially, authorities may provide URLs where a human user can report problems with an address or location. In addition, web services may be defined to automate such reporting. For example, the querier may wish to report that the mapping database may be missing a newly built or renamed street or house number.
动机：最初，当局可能会提供URL，供人类用户报告地址或位置问题。此外，可以定义web服务来自动化此类报告。例如，查询者可能希望报告地图数据库可能缺少新建或重命名的街道或房屋编号。
Lo7. Limits to validation: Successful validation of a civic location MUST NOT be required to place an emergency call.
Lo7。验证限制：拨打紧急呼叫时，不得要求成功验证市政位置。
Motivation: In some cases, a civic location may not be considered valid. This fact should not result in the call being dropped or rejected by any entity along the call setup signaling path to the PSAP.
动机：在某些情况下，城市位置可能被认为是无效的。这一事实不应导致呼叫被PSAP呼叫设置信令路径上的任何实体丢弃或拒绝。
Lo8. 3D sensitive mapping: The mapping protocol MUST implement support for both 2D and 3D location information, and MAY accept either a 2D or 3D mapping request as input.
Lo8。3D敏感映射：映射协议必须实现对2D和3D位置信息的支持，并且可以接受2D或3D映射请求作为输入。
Motivation: It is expected that queriers may provide either 2D or 3D data. When a 3D request is presented within an area only defined by 2D data within the mapping server, the mapping result would be the same as if the height or altitude coordinate had been omitted from the mapping request.
动机：预计查询者可以提供2D或3D数据。当3D请求出现在仅由映射服务器内的2D数据定义的区域内时，映射结果将与映射请求中省略高度或高度坐标的情况相同。
Lo9. Database type indicator: The mapping protocol MAY support a mechanism that provides an indication describing a specific type of location database used.
Lo9。数据库类型指示符：映射协议可能支持一种机制，该机制提供描述所用位置数据库的特定类型的指示。
Motivation: It is useful to know the source of the data stored in the database used for location validation, either for civic or geographic location matching. In the United States, sources of data could include the United States Postal Service, the Master Street Address Guide (MSAG), or commercial map data providers.
动机：了解存储在用于位置验证的数据库中的数据源非常有用，无论是用于城市还是地理位置匹配。在美国，数据来源可能包括美国邮政局、Master Street Address Guide（MSAG）或商业地图数据提供商。
Emergency service identifiers are protocol constants that allow protocol entities, such as SIP proxy servers, to distinguish emergency calls from non-emergency calls and to identify the specific emergency service desired. Emergency service identifiers are a subclass of service identifiers that more generally identify services reachable by callers. An example of a service identifier is the service URN [RFC5031], but other identifiers, such as tel URIs [RFC3966], may also serve this role during a transition period.
紧急服务标识符是协议常量，允许协议实体（如SIP代理服务器）区分紧急呼叫和非紧急呼叫，并识别所需的特定紧急服务。紧急服务标识符是服务标识符的一个子类，通常用于标识呼叫者可访问的服务。服务标识符的一个示例是服务URN[RFC5031]，但是其他标识符，例如tel uri[RFC3966]，也可以在过渡期间充当此角色。
Since this document only addresses emergency services, we use the terms "emergency service identifier" and "service identifier" interchangeably. Requirements for these identifiers include:
由于本文件仅涉及应急服务，因此我们交替使用术语“应急服务标识符”和“服务标识符”。对这些标识符的要求包括：
Id1. Multiple emergency services: The mapping protocol MUST be able to support different emergency services distinguished by different service identifiers.
Id1。多个应急服务：映射协议必须能够支持不同的应急服务，以不同的服务标识符区分。
Motivation: Some jurisdictions may offer multiple types of emergency services that operate independently and can be contacted directly; for example, fire, police, and ambulance services.
动机：一些司法管辖区可能提供多种类型的应急服务，这些服务独立运作，可以直接联系；例如，消防、警察和救护车服务。
Id2. Extensible emergency service identifiers: The mapping protocol MUST support an extensible list of emergency identifiers, though it is not required to provide mappings for every possible service.
Id2。可扩展的紧急服务标识符：映射协议必须支持可扩展的紧急标识符列表，尽管不需要为每个可能的服务提供映射。
Motivation: Extensibility is required since new emergency services may be introduced over time, either globally or in some jurisdictions. The availability of emergency services depends on the locations. For example, the Netherlands are unlikely to offer a mountain rescue service.
动机：需要扩展性，因为随着时间的推移，可能会在全球或某些管辖区引入新的应急服务。应急服务的可用性取决于地点。例如，荷兰不太可能提供山地救援服务。
Id3. Discovery of emergency number: The mapping protocol MUST be able to return the location-dependent emergency number for the location indicated in the query.
Id3。紧急号码发现：映射协议必须能够返回查询中所示位置的位置相关紧急号码。
Motivation: Users are trained to dial the appropriate emergency number to reach emergency services. There needs to be a way to figure out the emergency number at the current location of the caller.
动机：培训用户拨打适当的紧急电话号码以联系紧急服务。需要有一种方法来确定呼叫者当前位置的紧急电话号码。
Id4. Home emergency number recognition: User equipment MUST be able to translate a home emergency number into an emergency service identifier.
Id4。家庭紧急号码识别：用户设备必须能够将家庭紧急号码转换为紧急服务标识符。
Motivation: The UE could be pre-provisioned with the appropriate information in order to perform such a translation or could discover the emergency number by querying the mapping protocol with its home location.
动机：UE可以预先提供适当的信息以执行这样的转换，或者可以通过查询映射协议及其家乡位置来发现紧急号码。
Id5. Emergency number replacement: There SHOULD be support for replacement of the emergency number with the appropriate emergency service identifier for each signaling protocol used for an emergency call, based on local conventions, regulations, or preference (e.g., as in the case of an enterprise).
Id5。紧急号码替换：应支持根据当地惯例、法规或偏好（例如，在企业的情况下），为紧急呼叫使用的每个信令协议使用适当的紧急服务标识符替换紧急号码。
Motivation: Any signaling protocol requires the use of some identifier to indicate the called party, and the user equipment may lack the capability to determine the actual service URL (PSAP URI). The use of local conventions may be required as a transition mechanism. Since relying on recognizing local numbering conventions makes it difficult for devices to be used outside their home context and for external devices to be introduced into a network, protocols should use standardized emergency service identifiers.
动机：任何信令协议都需要使用某种标识符来指示被叫方，并且用户设备可能缺乏确定实际服务URL（psapuri）的能力。可能需要使用当地惯例作为过渡机制。由于依赖于识别本地编号约定使得设备很难在其家庭环境之外使用，也很难将外部设备引入网络，因此协议应使用标准化的应急服务标识符。
Id6. Emergency service identifier marking: Signaling protocols MUST support emergency service identifiers to mark a call as an emergency call.
Id6。紧急服务标识符标记：信令协议必须支持紧急服务标识符，以将呼叫标记为紧急呼叫。
Motivation: Marking ensures proper handling as an emergency call by downstream elements that may not recognize, for example, a local variant of a logical emergency address. This marking mechanism is related to, but independent of, marking calls for prioritized call handling [RFC4412].
动机：标记可确保下游元件（例如，可能无法识别逻辑紧急地址的本地变体）正确处理紧急呼叫。该标记机制与标记优先呼叫处理的呼叫相关，但与之无关[RFC4412]。
Id7. Handling unrecognized emergency service identifiers: There MUST be support for calls that are initiated as emergency calls even if the specific emergency service requested is not recognized by the ESRP. Such calls will then be routed to a generic emergency service.
Id7。处理无法识别的紧急服务标识符：必须支持作为紧急呼叫发起的呼叫，即使ESRP无法识别请求的特定紧急服务。然后，此类呼叫将被转接至通用紧急服务。
Motivation: Fallback routing allows new emergency services to be introduced incrementally, while avoiding non-routable emergency calls. For example, a call for marine rescue services would be routed to a general PSAP if the caller's location does not offer marine rescue services yet.
动机：备用路由允许增量引入新的紧急服务，同时避免不可路由的紧急呼叫。例如，如果呼叫者所在地尚未提供海上救援服务，则海上救援服务呼叫将被路由到通用PSAP。
Id8. Return fallback service identifier: The mapping protocol MUST be able to report back the actual service mapped if the mapping protocol substitutes another service for the one requested.
Id8。Return fallback service identifier：如果映射协议用另一个服务替换请求的服务，则映射协议必须能够报告映射的实际服务。
Motivation: A mapping server may be configured to automatically look up the PSAP for another service if the user-requested service is not available for that location. For example, if there is no marine rescue service, the mapping protocol might return the PSAP URL for general emergencies and include the "urn:service.sos" identifier in the response to alert the querier to that fact.
动机：如果用户请求的服务在该位置不可用，可以将映射服务器配置为自动查找另一个服务的PSAP。例如，如果没有海上救援服务，映射协议可能会返回一般紧急情况下的PSAP URL，并在响应中包含“urn:service.sos”标识符，以提醒查询者该事实。
Id9. Discovery of visited emergency numbers: The mapping protocol MUST support a mechanism to allow the end device to learn visited emergency numbers.
Id9。发现访问过的紧急号码：映射协议必须支持一种机制，允许终端设备学习访问过的紧急号码。
Motivation: Travelers visiting a foreign country may observe the local emergency number, e.g., seeing it painted on the side of a fire truck, and then rightfully expect to be able to dial that emergency number. Similarly, a local "good Samaritan" may use a tourist's cell phone to summon help.
动机：到外国旅游的游客可能会看到当地的紧急电话号码，例如，看到它画在消防车的侧面，然后理所当然地期望能够拨打该紧急电话号码。同样，当地的“好心人”可能会用游客的手机呼救。
There are two basic approaches to invoke the mapping protocol. We refer to these as caller-based and mediated. In each case, the mapping client initiates a request to a mapping server via a mapping protocol. A proposed mapping protocol, LoST, is outlined in [lost].
调用映射协议有两种基本方法。我们称之为基于呼叫者的和中介的。在每种情况下，映射客户端都通过映射协议向映射服务器发起请求。[LoST]中概述了拟议的映射协议LoST。
For caller-based resolution, the caller's user agent invokes the mapping protocol to determine the appropriate PSAP based on the
对于基于呼叫者的解析，呼叫者的用户代理调用映射协议以根据
location provided. The resolution may take place well before the actual emergency call is placed, or at the time of the call.
提供的位置。解决方案可能在实际紧急呼叫之前或呼叫时进行。
For mediated resolution, an emergency call routing support entity, such as a SIP (outbound) proxy or redirect server, invokes the mapping service.
对于中介解析，紧急呼叫路由支持实体（如SIP（出站）代理或重定向服务器）调用映射服务。
Since servers may be used as outbound proxy servers by clients that are not in the same geographic area as the proxy server, any proxy server has to be able to translate any caller location to the appropriate PSAP. (A traveler may, for example, accidentally or intentionally configure its home proxy server as its outbound proxy server, even while far away from home.)
由于服务器可能被与代理服务器不在同一地理区域的客户端用作出站代理服务器，因此任何代理服务器都必须能够将任何调用方位置转换为适当的PSAP。（例如，旅行者可能会意外或故意将其家庭代理服务器配置为其出站代理服务器，即使在离家很远的情况下也是如此。）
Ma1. Baseline query protocol: A mandatory-to-implement protocol MUST be specified.
Ma1。基线查询协议：必须指定实现协议所必需的。
Motivation: An over-abundance of similarly capable choices appears undesirable for interoperability.
动机：对于互操作性来说，过多类似功能的选择似乎是不可取的。
Ma2. Extensible protocol: The mapping protocol MUST be designed to support the extensibility of location data elements, both for new and existing fields.
Ma2。可扩展协议：映射协议必须设计为支持新字段和现有字段的位置数据元素的可扩展性。
Motivation: This is needed, for example, to accommodate future extensions-to-location information that might be included in the PIDF-LO ([RFC4119]).
动机：这是必要的，例如，为了适应可能包含在PIDF-LO（[RFC4119]）中的位置信息的未来扩展。
Ma3. Incrementally deployable: The mapping protocol MUST be designed to support its incremental deployment.
Ma3。增量部署：映射协议必须设计为支持其增量部署。
Motivation: It must not be necessary, for example, to have a global street level database before deploying the system. It is acceptable to have some misrouting of calls when the database does not (yet) contain accurate PSAP service area information.
动机：例如，在部署系统之前，不必拥有全局街道级数据库。当数据库（尚未）包含准确的PSAP服务区域信息时，可以接受一些错误的呼叫路由。
Ma4. Any time mapping: The mapping protocol MUST support the ability of the mapping function to be invoked at any time, including while an emergency call is in process and before an emergency call is initiated.
Ma4。任何时间映射：映射协议必须支持在任何时候调用映射功能的能力，包括在紧急呼叫进行中和启动紧急呼叫之前。
Motivation: If the mapping query fails at call time, it may be advantageous to be able to fall back to the result of an earlier mapping query. This prior knowledge would be obtained by performing a mapping query at any time prior to an emergency call.
动机：如果映射查询在调用时失败，那么能够返回到先前映射查询的结果可能是有利的。通过在紧急呼叫之前的任何时间执行映射查询，可以获得此先验知识。
Ma5. Anywhere mapping: The mapping protocol MUST support the ability to provide mapping information in response to an individual query from any (earthly) location, regardless of where the mapping client is located, either geographically or by network location.
Ma5。Anywhere映射：映射协议必须支持提供映射信息的能力，以响应来自任何（地球）位置的单个查询，而不管映射客户端位于何处（地理位置或网络位置）。
Motivation: The mapping client, such as an ESRP, may not necessarily be anywhere close to the caller or the appropriate PSAP, but must still be able to obtain mapping information.
动机：映射客户机（如ESRP）不一定离调用方或适当的PSAP很近，但必须仍然能够获得映射信息。
Ma6. Appropriate PSAP: The mapping protocol MUST support the routing of an emergency call to the PSAP responsible for a particular geographic area.
Ma6。适当的PSAP：映射协议必须支持将紧急呼叫路由到负责特定地理区域的PSAP。
Motivation: Routing to the wrong PSAP will result in delays in handling emergencies as calls are redirected, and therefore will also result in inefficient use of PSAP resources at the initial point of contact. It is important that the location determination mechanism not be fooled by the location of IP telephony gateways or dial-in lines into a corporate LAN (and dispatch emergency help to the gateway or campus, rather than the caller), multi-site LANs and similar arrangements.
动机：路由到错误的PSAP将导致在处理紧急情况时发生延迟，因为呼叫被重定向，因此也将导致在初始接触点对PSAP资源的低效使用。重要的是，位置确定机制不能被IP电话网关或拨入公司局域网（并向网关或校园（而不是呼叫者）的拨号线路、多站点局域网和类似安排的位置所欺骗。
Ma7. Multiple PSAP URIs: The mapping protocol MUST support a method to return multiple PSAP URIs, which cover the same geographic area.
Ma7。多个PSAP URI：映射协议必须支持返回多个PSAP URI的方法，这些PSAP URI覆盖相同的地理区域。
Motivation: Different contact protocols (e.g., PSTN via tel URIs and IP via SIP URIs) may be routed to different PSAPs. Less likely, two PSAPs may overlap in their coverage region.
动机：不同的联系协议（例如，通过电话URI的PSTN和通过SIP URI的IP）可以路由到不同的PSAP。不太可能，两个PSAP可能在其覆盖区域重叠。
Ma8. Single primary URI per contact protocol: Though the mapping protocol may be able to include multiple URIs in the response, it SHOULD return only one primary URI per contact protocol used, so that clients are not required to select among different targets for the same contact protocol.
Ma8。每个联系人协议一个主URI：虽然映射协议可能能够在响应中包含多个URI，但对于使用的每个联系人协议，它应该只返回一个主URI，这样客户端就不需要为同一个联系人协议在不同的目标之间进行选择。
Motivation: There may be two or more URIs returned when multiple contact protocols are available (e.g., SIP and SMS). The client may select among multiple contact protocols based on its capabilities, preference settings, or availability.
动机：当多个联系人协议可用时（例如SIP和SMS），可能会返回两个或多个URI。客户端可以根据其能力、首选项设置或可用性在多个联系人协议中进行选择。
Ma9. Non-preferred URI schemes: The mapping protocol MAY support the return of a less-preferred URI scheme, such as a tel URI.
Ma9。非首选URI方案：映射协议可能支持返回不太首选的URI方案，例如tel URI。
Motivation: In order to provide incremental support to non-IP PSAPs, it may be necessary to be able to complete an emergency call via the PSTN.
动机：为了向非IP PSAP提供增量支持，可能需要能够通过PSTN完成紧急呼叫。
Ma10. URI properties: The mapping protocol MUST support the ability to provide ancillary information about a contact that allows the mapping client to determine relevant properties of the PSAP URI.
Ma10。URI属性：映射协议必须支持提供有关联系人的辅助信息的能力，该信息允许映射客户端确定PSAP URI的相关属性。
Motivation: In some cases, the same geographic area is served by several PSAPs; for example, a corporate campus might be served by both a corporate security department and the municipal PSAP. The mapping protocol should then return URIs for both, with information allowing the querying entity to choose one or the other. This determination could be made by either an ESRP, based on local policy, or by direct user choice, in the case of caller-based methods.
动机：在某些情况下，同一地理区域由多个PSAP提供服务；例如，企业校园可能由企业安全部门和市政PSAP提供服务。然后，映射协议应该返回两者的URI，并提供允许查询实体选择其中一个的信息。可以通过ESRP（基于本地策略）或直接用户选择（在基于呼叫者的方法的情况下）来确定。
Ma11. Mapping referral: The mapping protocol MUST support a mechanism for the mapping client to contact any mapping server and be referred to another mapping server that is more qualified to answer the query.
Ma11。映射引用：映射协议必须支持映射客户端联系任何映射服务器并被引用到另一个更适合回答查询的映射服务器的机制。
Motivation: Referrals help mitigate the impact of incorrect configuration that directs a client to the wrong initial mapping server.
动机：引用有助于减轻将客户端指向错误初始映射服务器的错误配置的影响。
Ma12. Split responsibility: The mapping protocol MUST support the division of data subset handling between multiple mapping servers within a single level of a civic location hierarchy.
Ma12。划分责任：映射协议必须支持在civic location层次结构的单个级别内的多个映射服务器之间划分数据子集处理。
Motivation: For example, two mapping servers for the same city or county may handle different streets within that city or county.
动机：例如，同一个城市或县的两台地图服务器可能处理该城市或县内的不同街道。
Ma13. URL for error reporting: The mapping protocol MUST support the ability to return a URL that can be used to report a suspected or known error within the mapping database.
Ma13。错误报告URL：映射协议必须支持返回URL的功能，该URL可用于报告映射数据库中的可疑或已知错误。
Motivation: If an error is returned, for example, there needs to be a URL that points to a resource that can explain or potentially help resolve the error.
动机：例如，如果返回错误，则需要有一个指向可以解释或可能帮助解决错误的资源的URL。
Ma14. Resilience to mapping server failure: The mapping protocol MUST support a mechanism that enables the client to fail over to different (replica) mapping server.
Ma14。映射服务器故障恢复能力：映射协议必须支持一种机制，使客户端能够故障转移到不同的（副本）映射服务器。
Motivation: The failure of a mapping server should not preclude the mapping client from receiving an answer to its query.
动机：映射服务器的故障不应妨碍映射客户端接收其查询的答案。
Ma15. Traceable resolution: The mapping protocol SHOULD support the ability of the mapping client to be able to determine the entity or entities that provided the emergency address resolution information.
Ma15。可追踪解决方案：映射协议应支持映射客户端能够确定提供紧急地址解决方案信息的实体。
Motivation: To improve reliability and performance, it is important to be able to trace which servers contributed to the resolution of a query.
动机：为了提高可靠性和性能，能够跟踪哪些服务器对查询的解析做出了贡献是很重要的。
Ma16. Minimal additional delay: Mapping protocol execution SHOULD minimize the amount of delay within the overall call-setup time.
Ma16。最小额外延迟：映射协议的执行应在整个呼叫设置时间内将延迟量降至最低。
Motivation: Since outbound proxies will likely be asked to resolve the same geographic coordinates repeatedly, a suitable time-limited caching mechanism should be supported.
动机：由于出站代理可能会被要求反复解析相同的地理坐标，因此应该支持适当的有时间限制的缓存机制。
Ma17. Freshness indication: The mapping protocol SHOULD support an indicator describing how current the information provided by the mapping source is.
Ma17。新鲜度指示：映射协议应支持一个指示器，描述映射源提供的信息的最新程度。
Motivation: This is especially useful when an alternate mapping is requested, and alternative sources of mapping data may not have been created or updated with the same set of information or within the same time frame. Differences in currency between mapping data contained within mapping sources should be minimized.
动机：这在请求备用映射时特别有用，并且可能没有使用相同的信息集或在相同的时间范围内创建或更新映射数据的备用源。应尽量减少映射源中包含的映射数据之间的货币差异。
Threats and security requirements are discussed in a separate document [RFC5069].
威胁和安全要求在单独的文件[RFC5069]中讨论。
The information in this document is partially derived from text written by the following contributors:
本文件中的信息部分来源于以下撰稿人编写的文本：
Nadine Abbott nabbott@telcordia.com
纳丁·阿伯特nabbott@telcordia.com
Hideki Arai arai859@oki.com
荒井秀树arai859@oki.com
Martin Dawson Martin.Dawson@andrew.com
马丁·道森·马丁。Dawson@andrew.com
Motoharu Kawanishi kawanishi381@oki.com
川川本春kawanishi381@oki.com
Brian Rosen br@brianrosen.net
布莱恩·罗森br@brianrosen.net
Richard Stastny Richard.Stastny@oefeg.at
理查德·斯塔斯尼·理查德。Stastny@oefeg.at
Martin Thomson Martin.Thomson@andrew.com
马丁·汤姆森·马丁。Thomson@andrew.com
James Winterbottom James.Winterbottom@andrew.com
詹姆斯·温特巴顿·詹姆斯。Winterbottom@andrew.com
In addition to thanking those listed above, we would like to also thank Guy Caron, Barry Dingle, Keith Drage, Tim Dunn, Patrik Faltstrom, Clive D.W. Feather, Raymond Forbes, Randall Gellens, Michael Haberler, Michael Hammer, Ted Hardie, Gunnar Hellstrom, Cullen Jennings, Marc Linsner, Rohan Mahy, Patti McCalmont, Don Mitchell, John Morris, Andrew Newton, Steve Norreys, Jon Peterson, James Polk, Benny Rodrig, John Rosenberg, Jonathan Rosenberg, John Schnizlein, Shida Schubert, James Seng, Byron Smith, Barbara Stark, Richard Stastny, Tom Taylor, Hannes Tschofenig, and Nate Wilcox for their helpful input.
除了感谢上面列出的人之外，我们还要感谢盖伊·卡伦、巴里·丁格尔、基思·德雷格、蒂姆·邓恩、帕特里克·法茨特罗姆、克莱夫·D.W·羽毛、雷蒙德·福布斯、兰德尔·盖伦斯、迈克尔·哈伯勒、迈克尔·哈默、泰德·哈迪、甘纳·赫尔斯特罗姆、卡伦·詹宁斯、马克·林纳、罗汉·马伊、帕蒂·麦卡蒙特、唐·米切尔、约翰·莫里斯、，安德鲁·牛顿、史蒂夫·诺里斯、乔恩·彼得森、詹姆斯·波尔克、本尼·罗德里格、约翰·罗森博格、乔纳森·罗森博格、约翰·施尼兹莱因、希达·舒伯特、詹姆斯·森、拜伦·史密斯、芭芭拉·斯塔克、理查德·斯塔斯尼、汤姆·泰勒、汉内斯·茨霍芬尼和内特·威尔科克斯，感谢他们的帮助。
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2119]Bradner，S.，“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”，BCP 14，RFC 2119，1997年3月。
[RFC3261] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002.
[RFC3261]Rosenberg，J.，Schulzrinne，H.，Camarillo，G.，Johnston，A.，Peterson，J.，Sparks，R.，Handley，M.，和E.Schooler，“SIP：会话启动协议”，RFC 3261，2002年6月。
[RFC3351] Charlton, N., Gasson, M., Gybels, G., Spanner, M., and A. van Wijk, "User Requirements for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) in Support of Deaf, Hard of Hearing and Speech-impaired Individuals", RFC 3351, August 2002.
[RFC3351]N.查尔顿、M.加斯森、G.吉贝尔斯、M.斯潘纳和A.范·威克，“支持聋人、听力障碍者和言语障碍者的会话启动协议（SIP）的用户需求”，RFC 3351，2002年8月。
[RFC3693] Cuellar, J., Morris, J., Mulligan, D., Peterson, J., and J. Polk, "Geopriv Requirements", RFC 3693, February 2004.
[RFC3693]Cuellar，J.，Morris，J.，Mulligan，D.，Peterson，J.，和J.Polk，“地质驱动要求”，RFC 3693，2004年2月。
[RFC3860] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Instant Messaging (CPIM)", RFC 3860, August 2004.
[RFC3860]Peterson，J.，“即时消息的通用配置文件（CPIM）”，RFC3860，2004年8月。
[RFC3966] Schulzrinne, H., "The tel URI for Telephone Numbers", RFC 3966, December 2004.
[RFC3966]Schulzrinne，H.，“电话号码的电话URI”，RFC 3966，2004年12月。
[RFC4103] Hellstrom, G. and P. Jones, "RTP Payload for Text Conversation", RFC 4103, June 2005.
[RFC4103]Hellstrom，G.和P.Jones，“文本对话的RTP有效负载”，RFC 4103，2005年6月。
[RFC4119] Peterson, J., "A Presence-based GEOPRIV Location Object Format", RFC 4119, December 2005.
[RFC4119]Peterson，J.，“一种基于状态的GEOPRIV定位对象格式”，RFC41192005年12月。
[RFC4412] Schulzrinne, H. and J. Polk, "Communications Resource Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 4412, February 2006.
[RFC4412]Schulzrinne，H.和J.Polk，“会话启动协议（SIP）的通信资源优先级”，RFC 4412，2006年2月。
[RFC5031] Schulzrinne, H., "A Uniform Resource Name (URN) for Emergency and Other Well-Known Services", RFC 5031, January 2008.
[RFC5031]Schulzrinne，H.，“应急和其他知名服务的统一资源名称（URN）”，RFC 5031，2008年1月。
[RFC5069] Taylor, T., Ed., Tschofenig, H., Schulzrinne, H., and M. Shanmugam, "Security Threats and Requirements for Emergency Call Marking and Mapping", RFC 5069, January 2008.
[RFC5069]Taylor，T.，Ed.，Tschofenig，H.，Schulzrinne，H.，和M.Shanmugam，“紧急呼叫标记和映射的安全威胁和要求”，RFC 5069，2008年1月。
[lost] Hardie, T., "LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation Protocol", Work in Progress, August 2007.
[lost]Hardie，T.，“lost:Location to Service Translation Protocol”，正在进行的工作，2007年8月。
[toip] Wijk, A. and G. Gybels, "Framework for real-time text over IP using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", Work in Progress, August 2006.
[toip]Wijk，A.和G.Gybels，“使用会话启动协议（SIP）的IP实时文本框架”，正在进行的工作，2006年8月。
Authors' Addresses
作者地址
Henning Schulzrinne Columbia University Department of Computer Science 450 Computer Science Building New York, NY 10027 US
美国纽约州纽约市哥伦比亚大学计算机科学系计算机科学大楼450号
Phone: +1 212 939 7004
EMail: hgs+ecrit@cs.columbia.edu
URI: http://www.cs.columbia.edu
Phone: +1 212 939 7004
EMail: hgs+ecrit@cs.columbia.edu
URI: http://www.cs.columbia.edu
Roger Marshall (editor) TeleCommunication Systems, Inc. 2401 Elliott Avenue 2nd Floor Seattle, WA 98121 US
罗杰·马歇尔（编辑）美国华盛顿州西雅图市艾略特大道2401号2楼电信系统公司98121
Phone: +1 206 792 2424
EMail: rmarshall@telecomsys.com
URI: http://www.telecomsys.com
Phone: +1 206 792 2424
EMail: rmarshall@telecomsys.com
URI: http://www.telecomsys.com
Full Copyright Statement
完整版权声明
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
版权所有（C）IETF信托基金（2008年）。
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
本文件受BCP 78中包含的权利、许可和限制的约束，除其中规定外，作者保留其所有权利。
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
本文件及其包含的信息以“原样”为基础提供，贡献者、他/她所代表或赞助的组织（如有）、互联网协会、IETF信托基金和互联网工程任务组不承担任何明示或暗示的担保，包括但不限于任何保证，即使用本文中的信息不会侵犯任何权利，或对适销性或特定用途适用性的任何默示保证。
Intellectual Property
知识产权
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
IETF对可能声称与本文件所述技术的实施或使用有关的任何知识产权或其他权利的有效性或范围，或此类权利下的任何许可可能或可能不可用的程度，不采取任何立场；它也不表示它已作出任何独立努力来确定任何此类权利。有关RFC文件中权利的程序信息，请参见BCP 78和BCP 79。
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
向IETF秘书处披露的知识产权副本和任何许可证保证，或本规范实施者或用户试图获得使用此类专有权利的一般许可证或许可的结果，可从IETF在线知识产权存储库获取，网址为http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
IETF邀请任何相关方提请其注意任何版权、专利或专利申请，或其他可能涵盖实施本标准所需技术的专有权利。请将信息发送至IETF的IETF-ipr@ietf.org.