[VoiceOps] NENA SIP Marking Specifications

[Brian Knight]

Hi David, thanks for the reply.

Unfortunately, a "private" network doesn't necessarily mean dedicated 
infrastructure.  Their documentation explicitly states that "ESInets may 
be constructed from a mix of dedicated and shared facilities."  So it 
seems like it should be in NENA's best interest to follow the de facto 
standard to ensure operation over shared facilities.

Thanks,

-Brian


On 2020-03-17 17:45, Hiers, David wrote:
> Hi Brian,
> 
> That standard applies to " Emergency Services IP Networks", which, by
> definition, are entirely private.   They control their entire
> universe; there is simply no reason for NENA to care about default
> behavior of any device or network.
> 
> As to why they picked these values...  I have no idea, but they
> defined 'most networks' as out of scope, so why not?
> 
> David
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of 
> Brian Knight
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 2:22 PM
> To: Voiceops <voiceops at voiceops.org>
> Subject: [VoiceOps] NENA SIP Marking Specifications
> 
> I have been working to deploy a new private WAN for a customer that
> services E911 emergency calls delivered over VoIP.  While working on
> this, I learned that their DSCP markings for SIP control traffic are
> AF12, not AF31 or CS3 which is what I typically see from our other
> enterprise customers.  Media is still marked EF.
> 
> These markings appear to have been standardized by a body called NENA,
> National Emergency Number Association.  Googling 'NENA SIP "AF12"'
> returns the relevant PDFs.  Below is a sample from their standards 
> guide.
> 
> DSCP | Use                              | PHB
> -----+----------------------------------+--------
> 0    | Routine Traffic                  | Default
> 1    | 9-1-1 Signaling                  | AF12
> 2    | 9-1-1 Text Media                 | AF12
> 3    | 9-1-1 Audio Media                | EF
> 4    | 9-1-1 Video Media                | AF11
> 5    | 9-1-1 Non-human-initiated Call   | AF21
> 6    | Intra ESInet* Events             | AF21
> 7    | Intra ESInet Other 9-1-1 Traffic | AF22
> 
> (* Emergency Services IP Network)
> 
> Does anyone know the reasoning behind specifying SIP as AF12 instead
> of AF31?  While developing these standards, was NENA aware that AF12
> tends to be prioritized lower than AF31 on most networks?
> 
> Just trying to get some background on the decision.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -Brian
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
> addressee and may contain information that is privileged and
> confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended
> recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient,
> you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication
> is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
> error, notify the sender immediately by return email and delete the
> message and any attachments from your system.