Kari's Law PBX requirement
-
I'll preface this by saying:
1. I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
2. Please contact an attorney to ask this question.
3. The below advice is our interpretation and should be understood as a suggestion, not legal advice.Now that the corporatey stuff is over...
Our understanding is that Kari's law wants you to configure 911 so that emergency responders know which door to open inside of the big building. If it is a large school, then which classroom door should they open. If it is a hotel, then which room. etc.
To that end, if your customer has multiple floors, then yea, you would need to configure an E911 address for that floor which would be unique to that phone number. Before Kari's law, it was common for installers to just use the address of a school campus, and not provide additional details. It saved them money, but was not helpful in emergency situations since some school campuses are as large as small cities and more detailed information is required.
-
@Skyetel said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
Our understanding is that Kari's law wants you to configure 911 so that emergency responders know which door to open inside of the big building. If it is a large school, then which classroom door should they open. If it is a hotel, then which room. etc.
This is insane! It basically means that pretty much any phone would need it's own DID so you could have this level of detail.
Of course, if you work in cubeland - that can be pushed down to a shared DID, but if there is an office, then you're saying each one has to have it's own.
That's just crazy and HUGELY expensive comparatively. I'd be looking to at $50 a month to my phone bill (assuming $1/m/DID) minimum.
-
I get the need to have a BIT more grandularity, but all the way to the door/office level is just crazy.
If this truly is the case, it seems like the phone companies lobby is getting a huge payday soon.
-
@Dashrender This would be where I'd run it by an attorney for your specific use case.
I don't know if a private office inside of a conventional office space would apply for this. If your office is only like 3,000 sqft, then once you open the main door you are able to see more or less everything in one glance. However, if you are in a 20,000sqft office, then you would indeed need to provide additional details like "NW Corner Office" or "Blue Office Door" etc. However, that's my conjecture. Check with an attorney
I can also add that we have a lot of unhappy customers about this, so you are not alone in your frustration. Its exacerbated by how expensive E911 is, even for carriers like us. I wish they had come up with some form of pricing relief in the ruling in order to comply with this. I also wish they would reform E911 entirely and stop tieing it to phone numbers, but that is a soap box saved for another day.
-
@Skyetel said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
I also wish they would reform E911 entirely and stop tieing it to phone numbers,
Yeah, that makes ZERO sense and shows that actually saving lives isn't part of their thinking. This is a completely broken system. Just the FCC trying to stall before people realize how little they are actually doing to keep people safe.
-
The law does not require a DID per location.
It requires a valid location be sent.
That said, most (basically all ATM) SIP trunk providers only send a single address per DID, currently.
I know of one company that already has a solution for this. There will be more.
The PSAP infrastructure is designed to accept more than a DID.
-
@JaredBusch said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
The law does not require a DID per location.
hmm... This specific statement stymies me.
Though in reading your additional information - assuming 911 is able to read extra information, I suppose it's technically correct. Instead of 911 simply relying up location data associated with DIDs, the PBX could provide the location data directly with the call.What vendor is currently allowing this to happen, @JaredBusch and what PBXs currently support it? (I'm assuming FreePBX does though possibly only through manual creation of a dial plan?)
-
@Dashrender said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
Instead of 911 simply relying up location data associated with DIDs, the PBX could provide the location data directly with the call.
That's the idea. It's that the extra data or extension carry the location information, not just the DID.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
@Dashrender said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
Instead of 911 simply relying up location data associated with DIDs, the PBX could provide the location data directly with the call.
That's the idea. It's that the extra data or extension carry the location information, not just the DID.
OK I like this - so .... do we have it in FreePBX? - I know I know - go look it up yourself
-
@Dashrender said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
@scottalanmiller said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
@Dashrender said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
Instead of 911 simply relying up location data associated with DIDs, the PBX could provide the location data directly with the call.
That's the idea. It's that the extra data or extension carry the location information, not just the DID.
OK I like this - so .... do we have it in FreePBX? - I know I know - go look it up yourself
No. It is being worked on though.
-
@Dashrender said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
@JaredBusch said in Kari's Law PBX requirement:
The law does not require a DID per location.
hmm... This specific statement stymies me.
Though in reading your additional information - assuming 911 is able to read extra information, I suppose it's technically correct. Instead of 911 simply relying up location data associated with DIDs, the PBX could provide the location data directly with the call.What vendor is currently allowing this to happen, @JaredBusch and what PBXs currently support it? (I'm assuming FreePBX does though possibly only through manual creation of a dial plan?)
https://kb.clearlyip.com/trunking/FreePBX-PBXact-Automated-Setup-with-Module.html
