Internet Engineering Task Force SIP WG Internet Draft Gearhart/van Wijk/ Document: Sinnreich November 2000 Ericsson/WCOM Expires: April 2001 A Proposed Set of Requirements for SIP Support for Deaf or Speech Impaired Customers Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 [1]. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 1. Abstract SIP is attracting more and more attention as a valuable tool to enable and support voice and multimedia communications over the Internet. However, a significant number of potential customers for SIP-based services are for various reasons unable to, or choose not to, use voice communication technologies. This document offers a proposed set of requirements and identifies some of the key issues that need resolution to allow full accessibility for this group to SIP-based Internet communications. This document is intended to continue the discussion begun in a previous draft (see Acknowledgements) and to lay a foundation for design and implementation discussions in future drafts. 2. Terminology and Conventions Used in This Document In this document, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in RFC Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 1 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 2119 [2] and indicate requirement levels for compliant SIP implementations. For the purposes of this document, the term ôUser Equipmentö (ôUEö) will be used to represent the Deaf individual and his/her SIP-enabled UA end-user equipment; this could be a TTY[3], a personal computer or PDA, a specially equipped mobile phone, video phone, etc. The term ôuserö, in this document, shall be understood to mean a Deaf/deaf/hard-of-hearing individual. 3. Introduction The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)[4] is used to initiate, modify, and terminate interactive sessions between sets of users. Typically these are voice sessions, described by the Session Description Protocol (SDP)[5]. However not all customers or potential customers have access to these SIP services. Specifically, people who consider themselves culturally Deaf[6], audiologically deaf[7], hard of hearing, speech impaired or disabled, etc., on either a temporary or permanent basis, are unable to participate in these voice-based communications. For the purposes of this document, this group of people will be referred to collectively as "Deaf" individuals. Also, the term ôASLö (American Sign Language)[8], is used in this document to refer to the natural signed language used by culturally Deaf people in the United States and parts of Canada and Mexico. For Deaf individuals in other countries, ôASLö when used in this document should be understood to refer to the local sign language used by those people. Also, since Deaf people can and do use various types of manual communications systems in addition to ASL û such as Signed English û for this document the term ôASLö will be assumed to cover all forms of manual communications. Within the Public Switched Telephone System (PSTN), services have been defined that allow for access to circuit switched voice services by these customers. We believe it is important to offer these services in an IP context. The flexibility of SIP affords us the ability to both offer and improve on these services, and to offer more extensive forms of universal service access to this group of customers. This is a formative time for the future of IP-based communications and as such it is an appropriate time to ensure that such requirements as are necessary to ensure full accessibility by all customers are included in planning the new 3G network. 4. Purpose and Scope Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 2 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 This document offers a proposed set of requirements and attempts to identify issues that need resolution to allow full accessibility for all customers to SIP-based Internet communications. It will outline a few possible scenarios that enable universal access of voice and multimedia sessions, initiated by SIP, to users who are Deaf. These services are generally enabled by baseline SIP[1], or through the use of the caller preferences specification[9]. No additional extensions are proposed here in order to support universal access. 5. Background In the current telephony world, most Deaf individuals have access to either standalone or PC-based TTY devices. These text-based devices or software packages are adequate for communication with other Deaf individuals or with hearing individuals that have similar devices or software. In addition, most if not all states in the United States have state-sponsored Relay service, in which a human operator with both standard telephone equipment and TTY devices acts as a go-between ("relay operator" or interpreter), allowing a Deaf person with a TTY to place or receive calls from hearing individuals with standard telephones. Individuals with speech difficulties that render it impossible for the individual to use ordinary voice-enabled devices can use the same TTY equipment and relay services. Introduction of the relay service has been a great benefit to both Deaf and hearing people because it has enabled communication between them, where, prior to this time, it was difficult or impossible. It has provided independence to Deaf people, allowing them to communicate on their own terms rather than being forced to rely on hearing friends to act as telephone interpreters. In recent years, other technology such as two-way email pagers have become available that provide portable communications for Deaf people in a manner similar to cellular telephones for hearing people. These have provided a great benefit to Deaf people, allowing them the ease of near-instant communications that hearing people now take for granted. Some email pager services have also supported interface with other devices such as TTYs and FAX. In addition, most European GSM phones offer SMS (short message service) for exchanging short messages to other GSM subscribers. This will also allow Deaf people to communicate near-instantly. Most recently, the advent of video relay services has provided ways for Deaf individuals to converse with hearing individuals using their most natural means of communication, visual, through the use of an oral or sign language interpreter. The human interpreter is typically physically located at the relay center Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 3 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 and provides interpreting services via video connection to the Deaf person and voice connection to the hearing person. Much of what is included in this draft presupposes at least a superficial knowledge on the part of the reader of the Deaf world and the communication problems that have been endemic in that population since the creation of voice-only, long-distance communications. This may not be realistic, so the authors recommend the following books as supplemental readings for those readers who would like to know more. 1. Baker, Charlotte, and Robbin Battison. "Sign Language and the Deaf Community: Essays in Honor of William Stokoe". National Association of the Deaf, June 1980. 2. Moore, Matthew, et al. "For Hearing People Only: Answers to Some of the Most Commonly Asked Questions About the Deaf Community, Its Culture, and the æDeaf RealityÆ". MSM Productions Ltd., 2nd Edition, September 1993. 3. Padden, Carol, and Tom Humphries. "Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture". Harvard University Press, Reprint September 1990. 4. Stokoe, William. "Sign and Culture: A Reader for Students of American Sign Language". Linstok Press, June 1980. 6. General Requirements This section contains a list of general requirements that have been identified as important to ensure full accessibility to the 3G networks of the future. The relay center described above is a key part of the proposed solution. 1. The UE MUST be able to receive relay calls any time and any location. This capability is already included in SIP. The user preferences in the REGISTER will indicate what relay requirements are desired (at minimum text support MUST be supported). Upon logging in, the UE SHOULD be able to automatically download all user settings. 2. The UE MUST be able to set up user preferences easily to specify language, mode of relay (such as: ASL/video to/from speech, text to/from video or speech, also as an extended service English to i.e. Spanish text, relay can cross language barriers if supported). This is pre-set, but it can be overruled by one button or via a short list with alternative options. The UE and relay center SHOULD be able to enable/deliver services like a "real-time closed captioning" where the UE receives the video/audio of a caller/called, but the relay center will translate the audio and display the text Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 4 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 as subtitles. This will also offer possibilities like commercial translation service (via voice-over or text). 3. The UE MUST be able to receive the correct Caller-ID of the caller that calls the DP via the relay and not the relay's Caller-ID (note: this is the caller ID and not the SIP Call- ID). 4. The UE MUST be able to specify which pre-defined numbers require the use of relay service and which are direct calls (TTY to TTY, video to video) and do not require relay. 5. The UE MUST be able to download and upload the user settings and the address book, which should be stored as a database file at a centrally located server, which can be the relay center or the home provider of the UE. 6. It SHOULD be possible for a user to store user preferences and settings on a web service, similar to the ôMy Yahooö type service, to allow the user access to his/her personal profile and services from any web-enabled device. 7. The UE SHOULD be able to poll for the nearest Relay Proxy to reduce data traffic and reduce the cost of network usage. Also the UE MUST be able to change Relay service centers at any time (preferably via a menu with the relay service centers listed). 8. The UE SHOULD be able to use the relay service centers list to sequence the relay centers in a preferred position: which to use first for outgoing calls and automatically move on to the next in the list if it is busy or does not support the required services. 9. Relay centers SHOULD be able to advertise the services they have and update for new services, perhaps via a central registration (voluntarily) or via dialing into an info number. The UE should be able to dial automatically to such info numbers. This would stimulate competition between relay centers, which will lead to lower service prices and/or more different kind of services. 10. The UE SHOULD be able to hide from the callee that a relay center is being used. This means the user SHOULD be able to place the call as if the UE is actually calling the callee directly, while the relay center working transparently. This requires the relay center to act like a proxy. 11. Relay centers SHOULD be able to act as an answering machine and provide message services. The UE SHOULD have the capability to retrieve messages (answering machine mode). The UE SHOULD have a pre-configurable setting that automatically connects a calling party to the relay center for answering machine service Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 5 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 when the user does not want to receive incoming calls. This happens transparently without extra handling of the caller. Voice messages left for the UE MUST be interpreted at the relay center into the format designated by the UE (email, IM, video clip, etc.) and transmitted to the UE on demand or when the UE registers. Note: This ôanswering serviceö would also be a possible commercial service for non-Deaf users. 12. The UE MUST be able to distinguish non-relay calls from relay calls and direct TTY calls, if this number is NOT listed in the address book (which stores the number and options for direct UE to UE calls such as TTY to TTY, which do not require a relay center). A message will be sent to the originator of the call (183 Deaf USER RELAY call only). Depending on technological advances and the user's preferences, instead of the UE returning a 183 message, the UE MAY rapidly connect to the relay center and accept the call as if there is NO relay center in between (STEALTH mode; invisible relay services for the caller, in this way the user can conceal his/her hearing status). This should be seen as a separate service and possibly charged extra due the speed of accepting the call (minimal delay on picking-up) and extra effort to be invisible to the caller. Special hardware and software may be required for computer run speech to text conversion (this may require specialized relay centers). Note: this service can be used selectively for certain callers, and other callers are just notified by the 183 message. 13. The UE MUST be able to place calls transparently, the DP does not have to call the relay center first and then tell the phone number etc to call. It will be done automatically. A number will first checked in the address book in case of direct calls not requiring a relay center, if not, the UA will connect to the relay center and call the callee automatically. Ordering Pizza for example. 14. The UE SHOULD be able to place calls anonymously, a ôcloakö option that prevents the relay service to receive the caller-ID etc. In cloak mode, the UE sends a modified INVITE to the relay service with a random caller-ID and a tag indicating that this is an anonymous call. The relay center proxies MUST hide all via and route-record headers so that the call cannot be traced. The relay center MUST be required to make sure that there is no trace from the center to the UE. 7. Security Considerations Because an interpreter is generally required when a Deaf individual has a conversation with a non-deaf individual, whether in person or using a medium such as the telephone, interpreters are privy to a great deal of private information. For this Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 6 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 reason, both the Deaf and interpreter communities are vitally interested in the ethics and professionalism of the interpreter. Interpreters in the United States that are certified by the organizations recognized by the Deaf Community, such as the National Association of the Deaf (NAD[10]) and the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID[11]), are required as part of their certification to support the Codes of Ethics of their organizations. Hence these requirements: All relay operators and other interpreters or organizations involved in relaying calls SHALL be required to subscribe to a generally accepted Code of Ethics for interpreters. As an example, the Code of Ethics required for membership in RID is as follows: ôThe Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. has set forth the following principles of ethical behavior to protect and guide interpreters and transliterators and hearing and deaf consumers. Underlying these principles is the desire to insure for all the right to communicate. ôThis Code of Ethics applies to all members of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. and to all certified non- members. 1. Interpreters/transliterators shall keep all assignment- related information strictly confidential. 2. Interpreters/transliterators shall render the message faithfully, always conveying the content and spirit of the speaker using language most readily understood by the person(s) whom they serve. 3. Interpreters/transliterators shall not counsel, advise or interject personal opinions. 4. Interpreters/transliterators shall accept assignments using discretion with regard to skill, setting, and the consumers involved. 5. Interpreters/transliterators shall request compensation for services in a professional and judicious manner. 6. Interpreters/transliterators shall function in a manner appropriate to the situation. 7. Interpreters/transliterators shall strive to further knowledge and skills through participation in workshops, professional meetings, interaction with professional colleagues, and reading of current literature in the Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 7 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 field. Interpreters/transliterators, by virtue of membership or certification by the RID, Inc., shall strive to maintain high professional standards in compliance with the Code of Ethics. This Code of Ethics is widely accepted and supported as a standard within the American Deaf community and the American community of interpreters. More information on RID can be found from the organizationÆs web site, see reference [10]. In addition to the standards required for individual relay operators, interpreters, and companies that provide relay services, the actually transmissions MUST be secured. One option for this could be IPSEC. An extension to the requirement for ôcloakingö: relay operators/interpreters MAY act on behalf of the user, at the request of the user. For example, the user can ask the operator to call a company to file a complaint. This requires confidentially and an extension to the usual role of an interpreter. 8. References and Footnotes [1] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. [2] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to indicate requirement levels". Request for Comments 2119, Internet Engineering Task Force. March 1997. [3] TTY: an acronym for a text telephone device used by Deaf individuals to communicate via telephone systems; commonly referred to as a ôTDDö by the hearing community. [4] M. Handley, H. Schulzrinne, E. Schooler, and J. Rosenberg, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol". Request for Comments 2543, Internet Engineering Task Force, Mar. 1999. [5] M. Handley and V. Jacobson. "SDP: Session Description Protocol." Request for Comments 2327, Internet Engineering Task Force, April 1998. [6] "Culturally Deaf" individuals are people who have some degree of hearing loss but consider themselves as Deaf, not "hearing impaired". They tend to identify themselves as members of the American Deaf Culture, a unique cultural minority in America. See [8] for more details. Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 8 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 [7] "Audiologically deaf" individuals are people who have some degree of hearing loss but who tend to identify themselves as "hearing impaired" and as members of the majority hearing culture in America, not as part of Deaf Culture. See [8] for more details. [8] "American Sign Language": the natural manual language used by the members of Deaf Culture in America. For a more in-depth description of this language and its central role in the Deaf Community in America, see the text "_American Sign Language: A Teacher's Resource Text on Grammar and Culture_" by Charlotte Baker-Shenk and Dennis Cokely. See also the suggested readings listed in the Background section of this document. [9] H. Schulzrinne and J. Rosenberg, "SIP caller preferences and callee capabilities," Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, July 2000. Work in progress. [10] National Association of the Deaf. A national organization of, for, and operated by Americans who are Deaf or deaf. Organized in 1880, it is "the oldest and largest organization representing people with disabilities in the United States. The NAD safeguards the accessibility and civil rights of 28 million deaf and hard of hearing Americans in a variety of areas including education, employment, health care and social services, and telecommunications. A private, non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, the NAD is a dynamic federation of 51 state association affiliates, sponsoring and organizational affiliates, and direct members." See "www.nad.org" for more information on this organization. [11] Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID). A national, professional organization of interpreters and transliterators for the Deaf in America. "The philosophy of RID is that excellence in the delivery of interpretation and transliteration services among people who are Deaf, or Hard of Hearing, and people who are hearing, will ensure effective communication. As the professional association for interpreters and transliterators, the RID serves as an essential arena for its members in their pursuit of excellence. It is the mission of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc., to provide international, national, regional, state, and local forums and an organizational structure for the continued growth and development of the professions of interpretation and transliteration of American Sign Language and English." See "www.rid.org" for detailed information on this organization. Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 9 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 10 Acknowledgments The authors would like to acknowledge Jonathan Rosenberg, et al, for the initial draft "SIP Enabled Services to Support the Hearing Impaired" [Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, July 13, 2000. Work in progress], which began the analysis that has led to this document. The authors would also like to thank the following Deaf individuals, professional interpreters, and others who have contributed to the development of this document: Mr. Charles Estes, WCom Ms. Helene Cohen-Gilbert, Coordinator, Collin County Community College: Interpreter Preparation Program û Deaf. Mr. Grant Laird, Mr. Brenden Gilbert 11. Author's Addresses Cathy Gearhart Ericsson, Inc. P.O. Box 833675, M/S L-04 Richardson, TX 75083-3875 email: cathy.gearhart@ericsson.com Arnoud van Wijk Ericsson EuroLab Netherlands BV P.O. Box 8 5120 AA Rijen The Netherlands Fax: +31-161-247569 email: Arnoud.van.Wijk@eln.ericsson.se Henry Sinnreich MCI Worldcom 400 International Parkway Richardson, Texas 75081 email:henry.sinnreich@wcom.com Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 10 of 11] SIP for Deaf and Speech Impaired Customers November 2000 Full Copyright Statement "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (date). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into Gearhart/van Wijk/Sinnreich [Page 11 of 11]