Since its inception, 9-1-1 has been a victim of its own success.
Ninety-nine percent of the time, it just works, and people ignore it.
Government leaders have an “if it’s not broke, why fix it” mentality.

Unfortunately, this approach is short-sighted and puts lives at risk.
Simply put, 9-1-1 will increasingly fail to meet the needs of
Kentuckians and Americans unless it is upgraded to Next Generation 9-1-1
technology (NG911) — and this can only be achieved through an infusion
of federal funding.

https://www.kentucky.com/opinion/op-ed/article265431066.html

--
(Please remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly, and
note that the Telecom Digest email address must be changed in an
obvious way to send replies to the Digest)

On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 03:50:15PM -0400, Bill Horne wrote:
> Since its inception, 9-1-1 has been a victim of its own success. Ninety-nine
> percent of the time, it just works, and people ignore it. Government leaders
> have an “if it’s not broke, why fix it” mentality.
>
> Unfortunately, this approach is short-sighted and puts lives at risk. Simply
> put, 9-1-1 will increasingly fail to meet the needs of Kentuckians and
> Americans unless it is upgraded to Next Generation 9-1-1 technology (NG911)
> — and this can only be achieved through an infusion of federal funding.

I am always leery of "VoIP" networks, and this author's opinion
notwithstanding, I don't think they are a good idea for carrying /any/
kind of emergency communications.

There are at least two things wrong with the idea of using IP-based
connections to carry 911 traffic:

1. The basic, fundamental, underlying premise of the Internet's design
is that any particular packet can wait until a route is available,
and the packets that transport a 911 Voice-over-Internet-Protocal
(VoIP) connection *MUST* be given priority over other traffic - but
there is no mechanism in place to do that. VoIP is fine for my home
phone (if my ISP ever stops blocking it), but it's *NOT* a reliable
way to provide the "always on" connections needed for a PSAP to
talk to those in need of help.

2. Deep down in the glib come-on for the IP network which is supposed
to provide the virtual circuits that 911 must have, there is a tiny
little tell-all that gives the project's *REAL* purpose away. The
NSInet details say that all traffic will be carried over "private"
or "virtually private" paths. We all know what Virtual Private
Networks are - but what they are *NOT* is a virtual circuit, and
the fact that they're going to be used for the "new 911" tells me
that this allegedly "advanced" system will be composed of a few
concentrated cubicle farms in each state (if even that), trying to
use technology to relieve the ever-more-hungry politicians of any
obligation to hire and pay the multi-lingual, multi-cultural
specialists that currect E911 PSAPs are supposed to have on duty at
all times. Of course, if multi-lingual labor can't be found, there
will always be the temptation to "offshore" the centers overseas ...

You heard it here first.

Bill Horne

--
(Please remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly, and
please note that the Telecom Digest's email address must be modified
in an obvious way to reply to this post via email.)