The Board of Directors for ECIG has voted to open up a new
round of discussion among the ECIG membership to review the ECIG CAP
profile.
A new sub-committee, open to any and all ECIG
members, will review the ECIG EAS to CAP profile, both the CAP
protocol part
and the rendering implementation recommendation.

The Board thinks it would be wise for ECIG to review, examine, and if
necessary,
release an update to the original recommendation to FEMA. We also
think that
writing a formal "CAP EAS Implementation Guide" is warranted.

Why should we do this?

There have been important developments regarding a FEMA CAP profile
since the release of the ECIG CAP profile last year.

As most of you are aware, OASIS has conducted two rounds of review
to arrive at a proposed FEMA 1.2 CAP profile. There has also been the
move to CAP 1.2 due to a small required change that was discovered
earlier this year.
There are some important technical differences between the OASIS FEMA
IPAWS profile and
last years ECIG proposal. There are some sticky issues with audio
format handling,
and specific differences between use of proposed EAS parameters, as
well as a difference
in proposed interpretation and use of the values for the CAP <scope>
element.

There is also a complete lack of any recommendation from
OASIS regarding alert rendering issues, such as the proper methods
for deriving alert text for broadcast. This information
would be placed in the so-called "CAP EAS Implementation Guide".
There have been hints that FEMA might look to OASIS for writing
such an implementation guide. Many ECIG members feel that this
would be far beyond the scope of OASIS.

As manufacturers of EAS equipment, our members are at the front of the
line with handling the
difficult compliance issues broadcasters face with EAS. CAP will add
another layer of complexity to triggering EAS. It wll also add a new
"perceived"
responsibility to our members from broadcasters.
The membership has real world experience handling the implementation
of alert rendering, and is well suited to provide the "CAP EAS
Implementation Guide"

FEMA is moving forward at times fast and at times slow. But in light
recent announcements, it is very important that we conduct this work
soon if our voice will get a chance to be heard.

Regards,
Tom Wood
Member ECIG Board of Directors

Thanks, Tom,
Darryl

Please review.  We should plan on a all-member ECIG member meeting soon.

From: Gualdoni, Lindsey [mailto:Lindsey_Guald...@sra.com]
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 1:24 PM
To: omckin...@pbs.org; Arthur Leisey; Bobeck, Ann; Brian Cooper; clau...@mystateusa.com; Clay Freinwald; Darryl Parker; David Layer; Ed Czarnecki; Efraim Patel ; Frank Bell; Gary Timm; Harold Price; Jerry Lebow; Jim Heminway; Jim Kutzner; John Rue; Kenneth Ziegler; Larry Walke ; Lonna Thompson; Marek Mirbar ; Mathew Straeb; Richard Rudman; tf...@capitolgr.com; tferrent...@verizon.net; Tom Kuba; Tom Wood; Tomer Patel
Cc: Adrienne Gizicki; Ahmed, Agha; Alfred Kenyon; Bill Kalin; Carpenter, Claire; Dwarkanath, Sukumar - INTL; Gualdoni, Lindsey; Gusty, Denis; Jimmy Lee; Johnson, Antwane; Mark Lucero; Marlon Johnson; Retamoza, Ami; Rychlik, Dean; Sean Rough; Suits, Lisa (CTR); Walter Florence; Witmer, Wade
Subject: IPAWS Stakeholder Update

This letter is the second in a series of IPAWS Stakeholder Updates that is intended to supplement our Working Group Meetings.

In this Update:
•     Status on the CAP Profile
•     Status on the CAP-to-EAS Implementation Guides
•     Conformity Assessment Program
•     Federal presence at the International Association of Emergency Managers (IAEM) Conference
•     ATIS/TIA Approval of the CMAS C Interface Specification
•     EAS exercise in Alaska

CAP Profile

On October 13, 2009, the CAP IPAWS Profile (CAP v1.2 IPAWS Profile v1.0) was approved as an OASIS Committee Specification.

The OASIS Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) v1.2 Standard provides a standard for emergency messages to the public.  The OASIS CAP v1.2 IPAWS Profile is a subset of the CAP Standard to ensure interoperability with the existing and future emergency messaging systems including EAS and Next Generation EA; NOAA,  NWR, and HazCollect; and CMAS.

This approval was the result of an extensive process conducted by the OASIS Emergency Management Technical Committee, including two public comment periods.  FEMA IPAWS intends to announce IPAWS CAP adoption in Q3 FY2010.  This is a change from the last IPAWS stakeholder correspondence.

CAP-to-EAS Implementation Guide

A CAP-to-EAS Implementation guide is necessary to ensure legacy EAS equipment can handle a CAP message.  In order to successfully adopt the CAP-to-EAS Implementation Guide, a step-by-step approach involving industry experts, such as the ECIG, to develop the guide is being considered. The approach is currently going through an internal review process, which is set to end by January 2010. More details on the approach will be provided as decisions are made on the process moving forward.

Conformity Assessment (CA) Program

On November 20, 2009, FEMA IPAWS kicked off the CA Program at Eastern Kentucky University (EKU).  The CA Program will evaluate vendor products and certify that they are compliant with the CAP v1.2 IPAWS Profile.  Successful completion of the CA Program will result in a list of products with a Supplier’s Declaration of Conformity and listing on the Responder Knowledge Base.  Assessments will be conducted in two groups, the first from Feb through April 2010, and the second from May through June 2010.

Presence at the International Association of Emergency Managers (IAEM) Conference
October 31 – November 5
Orlando, Florida

IAEM brings together emergency managers and disaster response professionals from all levels of government, as well as the military, the private sector, and volunteer organizations around the world.  IAEM hosted their 57th Annual Conference and EMEX in Orlando Florida October 31st through November 5th 2009.

IPAWS, the FEMA DM Program, and FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute were represented through exhibit booths at the Conference.  A demonstration was facilitated between DM-OPEN and the vendors at the OASIS booth in the exhibit area of the Conference to demonstrate the live exchange of a CAP message.

ATIS/TIA Approval of the C Interface Specification

On November 5, 2009 the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) and the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) published the CMAS Federal Alert Gateway to CMSP Gateway Interface Specification.  This standard defines the interface between the Federal Alert Gateway and the Commercial Mobile Service Provider (CMSP) Gateway for CMAS alerts.

EAS exercise in Alaska

IPAWS is moving forward with development and implementation of an exercise of the national Emergency Alert System. Current plans are for a one state test in Alaska in January and goal of a nationwide test by the end of 2010.

Industry will convene again in early 2010.  During that meeting we will address the following action items from our last meeting.  If you have any other suggestions for discussion topics, please email Lindsey Gualdoni at Lindsey.guald...@touchstone.com.

     Pull together ECIG group to reconvene the question of how much testing should be done given the amount of products and product research being done in the field (Industry)
     Update the adoption timeline in the slide deck to decipher between adoption and implementation of the CAP profile (FEMA)
     Figure out how to engage the “implementers” (FEMA)
     Set up a way for participants to comment on questions asked during these calls, raise particular issues, and ask questions (FEMA)

As always please contact us if you have any questions, comments or suggestions.

Sent on behalf of FEMA IPAWS and DHS Science & Technology

Lindsey Gualdoni
The Touchstone Consulting Group
SRA International, Inc.
1920 N Street NW, Washington DC 20036
Office: 202.449.7409
Cell: 540.246.1213
lindsey.guald...@touchstone.com

Yes, I agree. The IPAWS program has announced important dates this
morning
in regard to vendor testing and creation of the implementation guide.
Tom

Would the membership and board entertain the idea of a members meeting next Thursday?

Edward Czarnecki
Executive Vice President
SpectraRep LLC
www.spectrarep.com  

Thursday is fine for me.
Darryl
TFT, Inc.

One more 'technical' point regarding IPAWS and CAP1.2 (as well as CAP1.1).

We are all used to see the location codes communicated by 6 digits (PSSCCC) and may not think of the fact that it refers to S.A.M.E.

CAPv1.1 & CAPv1.2 allow the use of FIPS, SAME or ZIP. In the examples, it is using the term 'FIPS6', and provides location code using 6 digits. However, if we refer to the NIST document for FIPS6-4, we find that the FIPS locations are defined only by 5 digits. To me it seems as a mix-up between standard indication and common practice. I believe that if the format is indicated to be 'FIPS' or 'FIPS6' then 5 digits need to describe the location, and if we want to keep on using 6 digits, then the indication should say 'SAME'.
It does not have to affect EAS decoders, which are using 6 digits anyway.

If I didn't miss anything here, we should add it to our comments regarding IPAWS and CAP.

Thanks,
Marek