ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

TECHNICAL REPORT

5th NG112 Emergency Communications Plugtests;
Remote event;23 January - 3 February 2023



2

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

Keywords
Testing, Interoperability, NG112

ETSI
650 Route des Lucioles
F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE
Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00 Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16
Siret N° 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C
Association à but non lucratif enregistrée à laSous-Préfecture de Grasse (06) N° 7803/88

Important notice
Individual copies of the present document can be downloaded from:http://www.etsi.org
The present document may be made available in more than one electronic version or in print. In any case of existing orperceived difference in contents between such versions, the reference version is the Portable Document Format (PDF).
In case of dispute, the reference shall be the printing on ETSI printers of the PDF version kept on a specific network drive
within ETSI Secretariat.
Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status.
Information on the current status of this and other ETSI documents is available at
http://portal.etsi.org/tb/status/status.asp
If you find errors in the present document, please send your comment to one of the following services:
http://portal.etsi.org/chaircor/ETSI_support.asp

Copyright Notification
No part may be reproduced except as authorized by written permission.
The copyright and the foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media.
© European Telecommunications Standards Institute yyyy.
All rights reserved.
DECTTM, PLUGTESTSTM, UMTSTM and the ETSI logo are Trade Marks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members.
3GPPTM and LTE™ are Trade Marks of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members andof the 3GPP Organizational Partners.
GSM® and the GSM logo are Trade Marks registered and owned by the GSM Association.

ETSI

3

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

Contents
Contents .............................................................................................................................................................. 3Intellectual Property Rights ................................................................................................................................ 4
1

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 4

2

References ................................................................................................................................................ 4

3

Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................................... 5

4

Participants ............................................................................................................................................... 6

5

Scope of the event .................................................................................................................................... 6

5.1
5.2
5.3
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.3.3
5.3.4

6
6.1
6.2.1
6.2.2

Objectives .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
Description ......................................................................................................................................................... 7
NG112 Emergency Communication .................................................................................................................. 8
General ......................................................................................................................................................... 8
Test Data ...................................................................................................................................................... 9
Test Tools ................................................................................................................................................... 10
Configurations ............................................................................................................................................ 10

Achieved Results .................................................................................................................................... 12
NG112 Interoperability Testing Results .......................................................................................................... 12
General Observations ................................................................................................................................. 12
Statistics ..................................................................................................................................................... 13

History .............................................................................................................................................................. 14

ETSI

4

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

Intellectual Property Rights
IPRs essential or potentially essential to the present document may have been declared to ETSI. The information
pertaining to these essential IPRs, if any, is publicly available for ETSI members and non-members, and can be foundin ETSI SR 000 314: "Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs); Essential, or potentially Essential, IPRs notified to ETSI in
respect of ETSI standards", which is available from the ETSI Secretariat. Latest updates are available on the ETSI Web
server (http://ipr.etsi.org).
Pursuant to the ETSI IPR Policy, no investigation, including IPR searches, has been carried out by ETSI. No guarantee
can be given as to the existence of other IPRs not referenced in ETSI SR 000 314 (or the updates on the ETSI Web
server) which are, or may be, or may become, essential to the present document.

1

Executive Summary

ETSI, in partnership with EENA (the European Emergency Number Association), has organized the fifth NG112
Emergency Comunications Remote Plugtests™ event. This event was held remotely, from 23 January to 3 February2023.
The aim of the event was to trial independently and jointly all components of the 112 communication chain based on
Next Generation networks. Different topics were addressed, including Location Based Emergency Call Routing, Policy
Based Emergency Call Routing, Next Generation Media Types and interconnecting different ESInet deployments.
Seven organizations from Europe, and North America, had the opportunity to connect their equipment to the test
infrastructure and validate the interoperability and conformity of their market solutions using different scenarios fromtheir own labs. In addition, five organizations participated as observers. In total, 12 organizations were involved in the
Plugtests.
The scope of the event included content-rich emergency calling, location- and policy-based routing and secure transport
via TLS. Participants put their products to the test, gaining valuable insights from experiencing a variety of scenarios.
Tested technologies included Unified Communication (UC) and Advanced Mobile Location (AML).
The event was used to validate the standard ‘Core elements for network independent access to emergency services,
ETSI TS 103 479’. This standard was published in June 2019 and a revised version will be published soon.
The results of the tests show that the NG112 technology is mature and that a large number of vendors provide thevarious elements of the NG112 equipment chain and that those elements interoperate with each other. Thus providing alarge choice of innovative products to build next generation emergency communication solutions. With the technicalfoundation of ETSI TS 103 479 and its accompanying standards, the conditions for procurement and deployment arereached.

2

References

The following base specifications were validated in the Plugtest.
[i.1]

Emergency Communications (EMTEL); Core elements for network independent access toemergency services, ETSI TS 103 479; to be published in June 2019

[i.2]

Emergency Communications (EMTEL); Advanced Mobile Location for Emergency Calls, ETSITS 103 625; to be published in June 2019

[i.3]

Emergency Communications (EMTEL); Total Conversation Access to Emergency Services, ETSITS 101 470, June 2012.
http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/101400_101499/101470/01.01.01_60/ts_101470v010101p.pdf[i.4]

Emergency Communications (EMTEL); Total Conversation for Emergency Communications,
Implementation Guidelines, ETSI TR 103 201, March 2016.
http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/103200_103299/103201/01.01.01_60/tr_103201v010101p.pdf

ETSI

5

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)[i.6]

3GPP. TS 22.173: IP Multimedia Core Network Subsystem (IMS) Multimedia Telephony Service
and Supplementary Services; Stage 1, Version 9.4.0, December 2009.

[i.7]

3GPP. TS 23.167: IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) Emergency Sessions, Version 9.3.0, December
2009.

[i.8]

3GPP. TS 24.229: IP Multimedia Call Control Protocol Based on Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)and Session Description Protocol (SDP), Stage 3, Release 11, Version 11.4.0, June 2012

[i.9]

Emergency Communications (EMTEL); Conformance test specifications for NG112, ETSI TS
103 659; to be published in March 2019[i.10]

Emergency Communications (EMTEL); Interoperability testing of core elements for network
independent access to emergency services, ETSI TS 103 480; to be published in March 2019[i.12]

Summary of all test resources at https://forge.etsi.org/gitlab/emergency-communications/NG112

3

Abbreviations
AML
BCF
ECRF
ELS
ESInet
ESRP
GW
HELD
HTTP
IMS
IP
IUT
IVS
LIS
LoST
MNO
mTLS
NGCS
PSAP
RFC
SDP
SIP UA
SMS
TLS
TS
UC
UE

Advanced Mobile Location
Border Control Function
Emergency Call Routing Function
Emergency Location Service
Emergency Services IP Network
Emergency Services Routing Proxy
Gateway
HTTP-Enabled Location Delivery
Hyper-text Transfer Protocol
IP Multimedia Subsystem
Internet Protocol
Implementation Under Test
In-Vehicle System
Location Information Server
LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation Protocol
Mobile Network Operator
Mutual TLS
Next Generation Core Services
Public Safety Answering Point
Request For Comments
Session Description Protocol
Session Initiation Protocol User Agent
Short Message Service
Transport Layer Security
Technical Specification
Unified Communication
User Equipment

ETSI

6

4

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

Participants

28 people including EENA (European Emergency Number Association) and the technical experts participated in the 5thNG112 Emergency Communications PlugtestsTM event. They were supported by an additional five-member ETSI team.
Participating organizations in the Plugtests who signed the Rules of Engagement (RoE) and Non-Disclosure Agreement(NDA) are listed below:

Organization nameCategory

AGEXIMCO

Observer

ATOS

VendorCestelVendorEENA (European Emergency Number Association)

Observer/Partner

Frequentis

Vendor/Technical expertiseGreater Copenhagen Fire Department (Hovedstadens Beredskab I/S)

Observer

GridGears GmbH

Vendor/Technical expertiseIntersys AG

VendorMicrosoft

Vendor

Ministère de l'Economie et des Finances

Observer

OracleVendor

SS8 Networks

Observer
Table 1: List of organizations

5

Scope of the event

5.1

Objectives

Main objectives of this event were to:- validate the interoperability of different solutions on the market on end to end emergency communication
utilizing next generation core services (NGCS)- provide an opportunity for developers from different companies to get together to test their implementations andensure interoperability between products- evaluate the level of conformance of several implementations to interface specification (RFCs, TS, …)
To validate interoperability the following features or services were considered for testing scenarios (a schematic
overview of the test infrastructure is shown in Fig. 1):- location conveyance (value and reference)- location and policy based routing

ETSI

7

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)- AML/ELS integration (SMS)- secure transport (certificates and mutual authentication)- ESInet peering options- roaming scenarios

Figure 1: Test infrastructure (ESInet 1 & 2)

5.2

Description

In this event five groups of tests considering different scenarios and test cases (examples: location based call routing,accessibility, different types of originating networks) were performed:- Generic: basic testing (audio, Location By Value (LbV), Location By Reference (LbR))- mTLS: mutual authentication (valid, invalid certificates)- Policy: retargeting based on time of day and SIP header fields- Peering: ESRP (ESInet 1) to ESRP (ESInet 2) & ESRP (ESInet 1) to BCF/access IF (ESInet 2)- AML: location updates and PSAP rebid (via HELD POST / GET location request)

ETSI

8

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

5.3

NG112 Emergency Communication

5.3.1

General

As in the previous editions of the NG112 Communications Plugtest event, the NG112 components and their interfaces,
as shown in Figure 1, of different vendors were tested working together. Scenarios and vendors combinations wereplanned and tests were executed.

Figure 2: Functional elements and interfaces (refer to ETSI TS 103 479 [i.1])
The objectives of the tests were:- Connectivity: Tests covered basic connectivity between functional elements at both, network and application
layer- Routing: Tests covered variants of location based emergency call routing. These included different methods howuser location is assessed and how this information is delivered- Media: Tests covered media types in order to contact emergency services- Location: Tests covered variants of location configuration and conveyance methods such as advanced mobile
location (AML)- Peering: Tests covered ESInet peering in different configurations

ETSI

9

5.3.2

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

Test Data

Testing several scenarios required creating simple polygons that define PSAP areas (or service boundaries) surrounding
the ETSI building. Figure 3 shows twelve polygons (rectangles) and predefined locations, three for each PSAP service
boundary (2x point, 1x circle). ECRFs were configured with PSAP service areas (refer to Fig. 4) and SIP URIs that
represent a PSAP vendor’s call processing equipment. LIS’ were preconfigured with locations (pin icons in Figure 3).
For instance, sip:alice-01@plugtests.app resolves to a location within the top-left PSAP (area shown in Figure 3) andtherefore calls originated by alice-01 shall route to the PSAP configured for that region.
To support ESInet 1 and 2, service boundaries were separated as illustrated in Figure 4. In total 48 locations (4 perservice area) were available for testing: ALICE01, BOB01, CAROL01, DAVE01, ALICE02, ... with ALICExx and
BOBxx as point, CAROLxx as circle, and DAVExx as civic location.

Figure 3: Pre-configured test locations and SIP identities (source: geojson.io)

Figure 4: PSAP regions, split in ESInet 1 and ESInet 2 (source: geojson.io)

ETSI

10

5.3.3

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

Test Tools

To simplify remote testing and to be able to perform simple tests without an originating device as part of a test scenario,
a new tool (also known as RoboDialer) was used to trigger emergency communication. This tool can be operated via thecommand line with curl or via the web browser or links (see Figure 5). To trigger a call, the following attributes are
required:• service=112|911; used to set proper service URNs
• caller=a2 (sip:alice-02@plugtests.app); used to define the location used for testing• bcf=vendor_1; used to select the BCF (can be omitted)• esrp=vendor_2; used to select an ESRP (indicated in a pre-loaded route-set)

Figure 5: RoboDialer (Web UI and CL Tool)

5.3.4

Configurations

Different test configurations were used to test interoperability among different service instances from different vendors.
The basic configuration, as briefly shown in Figure 6 below, supports Next Generation Core Service (NGCS) testing
scenarios, including scenarios with different service urns (URN), multimedia communication (audio, video and text)
and location delivery using identities (sip and tel URIs). Most test calls were placed from local user equipment (UE)configured to register one of the predefined identities with a SIP proxy. Depending on the emergency numbers dialled,
the SIP proxy forwarded calls to the border control function (BCF) inserting the corresponding service URN(urn:service:sos).
BCFs used static routing to forward calls to the ESRP used in specific scenarios or combinations. To route to the correct
PSAP based on the location received or requested at the LIS via HELD, the ESRP was requesting routing information at
the configured ECRF, and finally forwarded the emergency call to the PSAP serving the location at which the caller islocated.

Figure 6: General NGCS Configuration
Testing AML required to interface with a mobile network operator (4G) using a location independent phone number,
VoIP gateway (GW) services of a public VoIP service provider and a termination point within the lab, refer to Figure 7
below.

ETSI11ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

Figure 7: AML Test Configuration
Minor changes to the basic configuration were needed to support location by reference (LbR) testing. In that scenario,
the public SIP proxy requested location information at the LIS using the identity (tel or sip URI) received with the
emergency call as depicted in Figure 8. The response in a LbR scenario is an URL to be inserted in the SIP request as
Geolocation header value. The next downstream element that requires location information uses the URL to dereference
location information via HTTPS.

Figure 8: Location by Reference (LbR) Test Configuration
To test location by value, the public SIP proxy only forwarded calls by inserting a service URN, and the ESRP
requested location information at the LIS using the identity (tel or sip URI) received with the emergency call as
depicted in Figure 9. In addition the ESRP inserted location information as value (PIDF-LO) into the SIP message aspart of a multipart MIME body. The next downstream element that requires location information (e.g. PSAP) uses thelocation received in the message.

Figure 9: Location by Value (LbV) Test Configuration
Basic steps to test calls were: registering an UE using a specific identity (to get a location), dialing an emergency
number, and setting up audio, or multimedia calls.
Using subnetting, it was possible to use the networks connected via VPN for two different ESInet configurations. IP
addresses for NGCS were defined for ESInet 1 in the lower address range and for ESInet 2 in the upper address range.
In the course of the tests, two peering variations were tested. Figure 10 shows a variant in which the BCF of ESInet 2
was used for routing, and Figure 11 shows a direct peering with the ESRP of ESInet 2. In order to test both variants,
ECRF data were adapted accordingly.

ETSI

12

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)

Figure 10: ESInet Peering variant 1

Figure 11: ESInet Peering variant 2

6

Achieved Results

6.1

NG112 Interoperability Testing Results

6.2.1

General Observations• PSAPs and ESRPs can handle Location by Reference and by Value• BCFs performed successful interoperability with all originating and terminating networks or systems• All location boundaries were respected by the ECRFs and routed correctly by the ESRPs to the appropriate
PSAPs• Location provided by the LIS or by the end devices via AML was used successfullyoCalls via a public operator using AML were successful (SMS) using ELS Manager application• Emergency calls were successfully originated from Public VoIP network• Signaling and media interoperability with ESInet functional elements achieved• SIP-based audio calls connected with all PSAPs• NG eCall (initially planned) could not be tested due to the lack of IVS vendors• ESInet peering concepts successfully testedoRoaming scenarios and LoST hierarchy• Successful use of custom certificate authority issuing certificates for testing mTLS (SIP and HTTPS)• Policy routing (time or header value) successfully tested

ETSI

13

ETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)• In general, TS 103 479 basic features were successfully validated; future events shall focus on advanced features

6.2.2

Statistics

Overall results considering configurations as introduced in 5.3.4
Table 2: Overall Results
Interoperability
Not Executed
Totals
OK
NO
NA
OT
Run
Results
55 (100.0%) (0.0%) 31 (36.0%) (0.0%) 55 (64.0%) 86
Group results considering groups as introduced in 5.2
Table 3: Group Results
Interoperability
OKNO

Not Executed
NA

OT

TotalsRun

Results

Generic 24 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 12 (33.3%) 0 (0.0%) 24 (66.7%)

36

Peering 4 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 4 (100.0%)

4AML

2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (33.3%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (66.7%)

3

Policy 4 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 4 (100.0%)4mTLS 21 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 18 (46.2%) 0 (0.0%) 21 (53.8%)

39

Test results considering individual scenarios based on configurations as introduced in 5.3.4.
Table 4: Test Results
Interoperability
OKNO

Not Executed
NA

TotalsOT

Run

Results

LOC_LBV_01 2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 10 (83.3%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (16.7%)

12

LOC_LBR_01 10 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (16.7%) 0 (0.0%) 10 (83.3%)

12

LOC_AML_01

0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)

1

LOC_AML_02 1 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (100.0%)

1

LOC_AML_03 1 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (100.0%)

1

MME_AUD_01 12 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 12 (100.0%)

12

POL_TAD_01 2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (100.0%)

2

POL_SIP_01

2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (100.0%)2

PER_SIP_01

2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (100.0%)2

PER_SIP_02

2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (100.0%)

2

TLS_SIP_01

3 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (40.0%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (60.0%)

5

TLS_SIP_02

4 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (20.0%) 0 (0.0%) 4 (80.0%)

5

TLS_SIP_03

3 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (40.0%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (60.0%)

5

TLS_SIP_04

2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (50.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (50.0%)

4

TLS_HTTP_01 3 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (40.0%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (60.0%)

5

TLS_HTTP_02 2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (60.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (40.0%)

5

TLS_HTTP_03 2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (60.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (40.0%)

5

TLS_HTTP_04 2 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (60.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (40.0%)

5

ETSI

14

History
Document history
V0.1

20.02.2023

First draft

V0.2

07.03.2023

Final draftETSIETSI CTI Plugtests Report V1.0 (2023-03)