This NENA Standard defines the use of a Feature Group D like signaling protocol between the E9-1-1 selective routing tandem and E9-1-1 customer premises equipment (CPE) which is called “Enhanced MF Signaling”. This document does not suggest the implementation of Feature Group D trunking - there are tariff issues associated with FGD that do not apply to 91-1. Rather, it recommends borrowing the “off the shelf” MF signaling protocol from Feature Group D in order to facilitate the delivery of one or two ten-digit ANI’s to the PSAP over existing facilities, without creating an entirely new protocol.

Recent changes in telephony technology along with corresponding changes in the regulatory environment with respect to E9-1-1 Service are impacting the service architectures being defined for E9-1-1 Services. Support of Wireless Phase II and NENA i2 for VoIP are making enhancements to existing E9-1-1 functionality necessary.

The definition of service architectures to support Wireless Phase II and NENA i2 for VoIP functionality will impact both wireless and wireline networks. Since both wireless and wireline networks will play a role in processing an increasing number of Emergency Calls, it is critical that the interconnection for these networks be based on a common understanding of the functions and interfaces supported by each network.

This document provides a framework for consideration of the various factors impacting the management of call congestion and traffic engineering for E9-1-1 networks. A network reference model is provided for use in referring to generic E9-1-1 network entities. This is followed by a section that outlines generally accepted industry practices for traffic engineering for E9-1-1 networks.

This “NENA Recommended Standard for E9-1-1 Default Assignment and Call Routing Functions” document provides an overview of various database and network specifications and requirements related to Default Routing of 9-1-1 calls. It is intended to help local authority; database and/or network administrators select a model in the development of standard default routing arrangements. It identifies and defines methods used to assign defaults and route 9-1-1 calls when circumstances prevent normal selective routing. Each approach is used during a specific set of circumstances; similarly a specific set of circumstances shall determine which approach is most appropriate.

This NENA TID defines three distinct alternative trunking configurations to accomplish the provisioning of Private Switch 9-1-1 Service (PS/911) in conjunction with the use of Private Branch Exchange (PBX) telephone systems. For PBX systems that use digital trunks, Primary Rate Interface Integrated Services Digital Network (PRI-ISDN) trunks, the provisioning of PS/911 may be accommodated without the requirement of dedicated trunks for transporting 9-1-1 calls. For PBX systems that use analog trunks (i.e. they are not compatible with PRI and/or PRI trunks are not available from local service providers), the provisioning of PS/911 may be accommodated by using dedicated circuits that operate with the Centralized Automated Message Accounting (CAMA) signaling protocol.

This document contains standards requirements for providing the PSAP with a working callback number to all wireless phones that call 9-1-1. It brings with it the solution to a number of other open issues.

The purpose in determining voice circuit requirements for an E9-1-1 Trunk Group is to provide a transmission Grade of Service (GOS) for each 9-1-1 caller that is at least P.01 (probability that no more than one call out of 100 attempts made during the average busy hour will be blocked) and that, where available, physically diverse routing is being used between nodes.

In no case is it ever recommended that voice circuits be designed at less than P.01 Grade of Service (GOS). Note that P.01 can also be described as P0.01 in the industry. In this document that are to be considered as synonymous.

This document provides a review of the topics that are associated with the practice of delivering more than one type of an emergency call over the same trunk group into a legacy type E9-1-1 selective router.   It describes the market forces leading to the implementation of the practice as well as the technological pros and cons associated with it. The technical and operational implications of the practice are addressed from the perspective of many separate areas, including groups such as the originating service provider, network aggregator, E9-1-1 system service provider, Public Safety Agency (i.e., PSAP management/call takers), and regulatory bodies that govern 9-1-1 operations. 

This “NENA Standard for the Implementation of the Wireless Emergency Service Protocol E2 Interface” document provides explicit protocols and parameters for interoperable operation of the E2 interface over TCP/IP. 1This interface is between the MPC/GMLC and the EMSE as defined in TR45.2’s TIA/EIA/J-STD-036-A . This document defines the methods that MPC/GMLC and ESME use to interact, allowing for the concept of geographically redundant nodes and the inherent link management. It defines how the TCAP-based application protocol is to be encapsulated upon the TCP/IP stack.