And on a similar note replete with the hallmarks of inductive logic: For every sensational death or other ultimate catastrophe probabilistically attributable to VoIP E911 issues, there are probably thousands of cases of minor injuries, increased wait times, and other situations where the argument could be made that the response should have been more efficient and/or the problem resolved faster and more accurately. I have seen that come up as a dominant talking point in the context of calls getting routed to the wrong (in an administrative sense, not necessarily geographic) PSAP, or ALI information in fixed-line E911 databases not being up to date or applicable at the moment the call was placed. As VoIP gets more even more mobile and nomadic than it already is, I suspect there won't be any serious solutions until some sort of sufficiently universal GPS or transponder triangulation scheme similar to what cell carriers do for 911 is arrived at. And, of course, that is replete with privacy and due process implications. Not a simple problem by any stretch of the imagination, even beyond the technology and standardization aspects. -- Sent from mobile device On Aug 25, 2009, at 12:11 PM, Justin B Newman <justin at ejtown.org> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:09 AM, David Hiers<hiersd at gmail.com> wrote:
How many people have died because of mis-configured 911 VOIP services?
I know of two such cases, one in FL and one in Calgary.
Do you mean to say, "How many people have died following a failed attempt to dial 911 via VoIP"?
I would suggest that it is rare for medical professionals to say with certainty that had a call been "correctly" terminated to a 911 operator that a person's life *would* have been saved. Only that there would have been an increased likelihood of the caller surviving.
Semantics, yes. But ... a worthy distinction in my opinion.
Yours,
-jbn _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops