RE: [Geopriv] coming to terms on location by reference

It's also documented in the current SIP conveyance draft. I thought the
same but assumed Andy was confining it to the concerns of the Geopriv
group? Not sure of the theory here - perhaps consistency with other
working groups should not impinge on the processes of the WG. Is that
the story Andy?

Cheers,
Martin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Marshall [mailto:RMarshall@telecomsys.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 13 September 2006 1:53 AM
> To: Andrew Newton; geopriv@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Geopriv] coming to terms on location by reference
>
> The method of handling a location, "by-reference", is supported in the
> current ECRIT requirements draft as follows:
>
> Lo2. Location delivery by-value: The mapping protocol MUST support
> the delivery of location information using a by-value method,
> though it MAY also support de-referencing a URL that references
a
> location object.
>
> Motivation: The mapping protocol is not required to support the
> ability to de-reference specific location references.
>
>
> Roger Marshall.
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Andrew Newton [mailto:andy@hxr.us]
> >Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:18 AM
> >To: geopriv@ietf.org
> >Subject: [Geopriv] coming to terms on location by reference
> >
> >
> >As John Schnizlein has noted in a message
> >(http://www.ecotroph.net/~anewton/hypermail/geopriv/0607/2717.h
> tml), we have not truly come to consensus on location by >reference
> within this working group. The GEOPRIV working
> >group has been presented with many individual submissions for
> >both architectural considerations and concrete solutions.
> >Additionally, this working group has discussed
> >location-by-reference with regard to its component uses in
> >location configuration protocols, location dereference
> >protocols, and location conveyance protocols. As a working
> >group, we are much further along in our understanding of
> >location-by-reference than we were just 1 year ago. And as it
> >stands, there are many who feel it is valuable, many who feel
> >it is not, and many who have not given their opinions. But it
> >is now time for us to determine how we should move forward on
> >location-by-reference, either accepting it as a whole,
> >accepting it in limited form, or rejecting it entirely.
> >
> >To that end, I offer the following inexhaustive list of
> >observations on this
> >topic:
> >
> >1) Location-by-reference offers better efficiency where
> >location of a target is not determined by the target and when
> >the target wishes to convey its location. It is more
> >efficient because the target does not have to first retrieve
> >the location in order to convey it.
> >
> >2) Location measurement and determination (sighting) of a
> >target by another element is of limited scope as
> >self-determination methods such as GPS may offer greater accuracy.
> >
> >3) Authentication of the dereferencer may have unintended
> >consequences. For example, a referent host may require
> >authentication that could cause the failure of emergency call
> >routing. Therefore, location-by-reference may not appropriate
> >or could even be harmful for certain use cases.
> >
> >To further this discussion so that we may come to resolution
> >on this topic, I welcome comments regarding the above as well
> >as further observations.
> >
> >-andy
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Geopriv mailing list
> >Geopriv@ietf.org
> >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the designated recipient only and may
contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of
this email is prohibited.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[mf2]

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
Received on Tue, 12 Sep 2006 10:59:21 -0500