Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!ames!killer!vector!telecom-gateway From: kaufman@polya.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Cellular Phone & E911 Message-ID: Date: 26 May 89 15:50:25 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Reply-To: "Marc T. Kaufman" Organization: Stanford University Lines: 26 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 177, message 1 of 6 In article "james.j.sowa" writes: ->First of all E911 means two things: ->1) an ability to route the calling number to the proper ->serving PSAP. This means if one house has Police A and Fire ->A and the next house has Police B and Fire A the 911 call ->would go to the primary answerer (maybe police) in this ->case both calls go to poilce A at the PSAP when it is ->determined it is a fire call all the PSAP attendant will do is ->press a button labeled fire and the call will route ->correctly to the proper Fire department . The routing function is applied on a number-by-number basis, so that a single exchange may have more than one primary answerer, if the exchange slops over multiple jurisdictions (as many do). In my area in California, we got Police and Fire from two different dispatch centers, (because we use the county sheriff for police, and a neighboring city for fire). The sheriff put up quite a fight to get us to dispatch through the county com center. We finally prevailed, and now all calls go first to fire dispatch. This is because over 2/3 of all calls to fire are for medical aid, and may be life threatening -- so we felt fire response time optimization was more important. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@polya.stanford.edu)