As a 911 dispatcher and EMT, I appreciate this. When we get 911 hang up calls from hotel rooms. We call back the number and the front desk has no idea which room may have called... having the room number connected with the line/ notify them will get people the help they need. Now if they will just disband the collective answering centers! As of late several businesses have started using national call center and the 911 calls ring to them rather than directly into 911. They then call on the non emergency lines with emergencies. Causing a delay in response as they don’t always get the best info or location...

While there is some good information here there is also some misinformation here. First of all Kari's Law and Ray Baum's Act are separate both on compliance dates and what is actually required. Kari's Law is actually now fully required as of February 16th, 2020. Ray Baum's Act was made effective January 6th, 2020 and the deadline for compliance is January 6th 2021 for fixed devices and January 6th 2022 for non-fixed devices. Kari's Law does NOT require dispatchable locations Ray Baum's act does. Kari's Law requires the direct dialing of 911 and a notification to be sent. It applies to only MLTS sold or manufactured on or after February 16th, 2020 and any MLTS before that date is allowed to run till its natural end of life. The notification required is that 911 was dialed, a callback number, and same location info sent to e911 be sent in the notification. However, if the system can not send a notifaction without system hardware or software upgrade it is exempt. If it can not send location or callback because it is technology infeasible it does not need these parts either. Since my job requires me to actually know the law I have read the actual FCC documentation. You may want to do a better job of fact checking before releasing a video with so many inaccuracies. I do appreciate the information you did provide that was correct and helpful.

Common misunderstanding: The data is not sent to the PSAP directly. The SIP provider creates a record in a/the location database and then delivers the call (PSTN to the selective router) to the PSAP with a temporary pANI (psuedo-ANI, a non-dial-able number used for this purpose, different from that 16 digit number your provider is using) which is used by the CPE at the PSAP to query back the location record from the PSAP's ALI service provider. Direct delivery of the data from OSP to PSAP is only possible in NG911 (NENA i3 compliant, all SIP based) environments which are not yet common. E911 (i2) systems will be replaced with NG911 over the next few years... make sure your solutions supports PDIF-LO passing from the endpoint through the OSP all the way though to the Emergency Services IP Networks...many border controllers strip session details and location object from the PDIF!

And after all that work to get compliant first responders will ignore it. Because there was missing or out of date information on 6 of their last 10 calls. Especially those hot-desk employees who are expecting to update their e911 location every single day. And they quickly learned whatever button presses gets the prompt out of the way the fastest. The way it is implemented here is fine. There is just no escaping the Achilles heel of relying on the diligence of people who have their own job duties to worry about.

This will be a huge benefit to first responders to be able rely on this information to arrive at a scene much quicker. The problem with this whole thing is that we have to rely on end users to make sure this works, right? Whether it is hot-desking or some other mobile extension situation it could lead to high rates of inaccuracies in the data being sent to E911 PSAPs. I mean, unless IP desk phones are glued down or anchored down, people will move equipment around on their own without telling the Person in Charge (PIC) of the device. I have found out months after the fact, that someone's desk phone (extension) died, and they took a spare from somewhere else in the building and plugged it in at their desk and have just been using that instead because they didn't want to "bother anyone". In this world, if they called 911, it would potentially send the wrong location information and ECBP and if customers do this over years and years, data will get out of sync REALLY badly if this type of thing happens in a large office building or hotel. So, change management of location data for every device and mobile user and staying on top of people and ensuring PBX and trunk provider ECBP and dispatch locations are always up to date is going to be the biggest hurdle to compliance, not the PBX's or the Trunk providers capabilities - that is the easy part. My $.02

This is a great change. While previously the emergency services were able to call back directly the phone where the call originated from, now with the additional costs and only a central call back number they can only reach someone in the office who has no clue or might even think this is a prank call when the emergency services call for no apparent reason. So a lot of work needed to make the solution at best... different but not more secure. Thanks, legislators. What we need now is a system for DECT phones which requires the user (by audibly beeping) to confirm or update their current location in the building every 10 minutes. I hope ClearlyIP is on to that, because that is real innovation.

What about when the PBX is cloud based and the phone loses internet? No local PBX and no pots line to roll over to would result in no call getting thru to 911? Does this law require a device onsite vs cloud?

I run an IP Office PBX system (not VOIP) at work but I am having trouble figuring out if this applies to me since we use PRI lines. Our phone system is 8 years old and has only had one update since we got it. Is there a place where I can read more about these laws? We don't pay for support anymore so I don't even know how we would make these changes.

I really know nothing about VoIP but it would seem to me that you should be able to assign e911 location based on device ID instead of requiring user input which I view as a nuisance and a not unrealistic point of failure.

Curious if you've had any experience with Cisco Emergency Responder (not sure if Cisco still sells it...) but it handles a lot of this for Cisco shops.

I have internet phone at my house using OBi200 1-Port VoIP Phone Adapter with Google. It says it cannot be used for 911 calls. Does Kari's law affect that? Do I need to get different hardware? This is very interesting!

I am a noob at phone stuff, so this is just a random thought. Would it be possible to dynamically create a ring group for the callback number in a hotel scenario, so that only the phone dialing 911 and the reception desk / security office get the call? That way you would only have to have a few emergency-dedicated DIDs available and can provision them on demand.

Sounds like existing systems are exempt? Compliance date (MLTS direct dialing and notification) and Exemption for Legacy MLTSsort by: Kari’s Law and the Commission’s rules are forward-looking and do not apply with respect to any MLTS that is manufactured, imported, offered for first sale or lease, first sold or leased, or installed on or before February 16, 2020. (See 47 CFR § 9.17(b).) Compliance Dates (MLTS Dispatchable Location): The Commission’s dispatchable location rules for MLTS apply to all MLTS that are manufactured, imported, offered for first sale or lease, first sold or leased, or installed after February 16, 2020. While the dispatchable location rules apply to the same entities subject to Kari’s Law, the Commission established separate deadlines for MLTS to come into compliance with the dispatchable location rules. www.fcc.gov/mlts-911-requirements

The telephone systems, Nortel, Avaya support them without problems, this requirement is not new, many Hotel owners almost always request it, in our case although the Customer does not request it, we always implement it. But this goes much further, today many countries still do not have a single number of emergencies, and they use rare numbers, such as 112 in certain European countries. The above was solved by VitalPBX in a module that is already integrated and free. It manages to translate any number of emergencies in 911. In the end everything is defined in a subject of programming and the abilities of each implant.

Well, looks like it's time to upgrade our PBX from 2001, Merlin messaging system.

I think also the original story (from the petition) the daughter ended up getting room 911, 9th floor 11th room. Which was either not answered or answered by somebody who didn't know it was going on.

Does this affect residential users that happen to be using freepbx/clearlyip etc?

Please do not for get The Uk we use 999. but we have to set system so you call 911 or 112

Did you forget 112?

When will you be showing the door access system from ubiquiti ?

I'm glad this law finally got passed. I was volunteering at a homeless shelter and there was an incident. the Director was there in the back and tried to use the landline phone system after a couple of attempts was unable to and had to track down any cell phone to make the call. I suspect the system did not do direct 911 Dial out and needed an extra 9 for an outside line. But the problem is very few people who use a phone system would ever have to dial 911 thankfully, and we are mentally programmed that's all you need to do. so nobody really thinks that they might need to dial an outside line 1st. aka 9-911. And this is worsened if you have volunteers that have never used a phone system before. Part of using a phone system should be intuitive and part of this is learned, which means if you've never learned it… In the moment you're not gonna think about that.

Can Clearly IP SIP be used as a home user?

We're using an US based trunk/number for US calls in and out, but offices are in Europe. I guess we are except from these laws ;-) Of cause we don't dial 911 on that trunk.

Excellent..!

Shit this is amazing :D this should be in every PBX all over the world

Song name ?

I get having any PBX system must allow 911 to be dialed directly, I also get that you should have the location set correctly, but if you're going to require it then stop adding the fees, don't require crazy amounts of DIDs to be added per location. Noted below is the fact that the operator will ask the person where they are, and then the responding personal are going to ask who is having problems not following what a computer says. Also if this is a new requirement of e911 than PBX software needs to get this figured out not some extra cost add-in. Finally, just stop having systems that require dialing a number to make a normal call, it was all that was wrong with Kari's fatality and is just annoying to everyone.

I hear there is a requirement to be in effect July/August of this year as opposed to Feb 21/22. Is there a Gov cited showing the actual dates? I sawwww.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/12/05/2019-20137/implementing-karis-law-and-ray-baums-act-inquiry-concerning-911-access-routing-and-location-in. It shows various dates for fixed and non fixed. Hiw is a PXB differentiated than a a standard Cisco CUCM ? Btw, thank u for the video. It's the first one that gave a digestible version of the requirements

This is BS. How the hell are you going to locate softphone on a laptop, which is always moving?! Someone could call 911 from workplace, calling an ambulance, and three hours later, use the same softphone to call police to a café in another city, where this worker was sent on a business trip, and further four hours later from his/her home, because neighbours house is on fire! This would appear like all three of those calls were comming from the same address and the same office! The same problem as with mobile phones, only worse, because dispatcher is being fed information, which was correct only once out of three cases. As to why would someone use a softphone like this? Simple. He's litelarly sitting in front of it.

Good! I hope this gets implemented in Canada too!

This seems to be a huge amount of work given that 80% of 911 calls are made from from cell phones. As usual the legislation is targeting the exception.

what about Skype/Teams?

Be careful with mapping single digits as "911" was chosen to be somewhat obscure to avoid being accidentally dialed. 993 did not know about that, interesting is that everywhere? And FYI most other countries use 999 and have included text emergency services for a while which should be required here! None of this "well.... maybe... will... implement it, if we feel like it and get money." across the various cell carriers.

Have you worked with Avaya before?

Great resource for all 3 letter spy agencies 🤔

What are the penalties, you didn't cover that 😜?

we should just do away with hotel phones, problem solved :)

Another law.....

first