RE: [Geopriv] WGLC: draft-ietf-geopriv-pidf-lo-profile-07.txt

From: Roger Marshall ^lt;>
Date: Thu Jun 21 2007 - 18:44:09 EDT

I still don't understand. Let me try again, by defining terms.

-- Location Determination: method by which a location is 'calculated' or
'given'. This could be, for example something like trilateration (often
referred to as triangulation), or manually input (provisioned),

This definition is similar, but not exactly the same as what you've
stated in another of your drafts,
ties-01.txt), since your definition doesn't take into account manual

  Location Determination: The process of finding the location of a
      Device, either by calculation or correlation. The many-varied
      processes for location determination are outside the scope of this

-- Location Configuration: method by which a location is 'acquired' into
an end device or middlebox, for subsequent use in a location-based
operation (e.g., LoST routing).

My following assertions are based on the above defns.

In the pidf-lo-profile draft, rules 3 & 5 text talk about determination,
not configuration. From prior email, it sounds like the intent of 3 & 5
is for configuration, not determination. If so, let's change the term.

My original point around rule 5 was that, if you don't change the term
from determination to configuration, then rule 5 cannot always work -
since a lat/lon produced via trilateration and a bldg. floor produced by
extrapolation are NOT the same (determination) method - thus violating
the rule.

My point to rule 3, was that the justification text should likewise be
changed to 'configured' instead of 'determined' for all the same

-roger marshall.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Winterbottom, James []
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 2:56 PM
> To: Roger Marshall; Robert Sparks;
> Subject: RE: [Geopriv] WGLC: draft-ietf-geopriv-pidf-lo-profile-07.txt
> Hi Roger,
> One quick further comment below.
> >
> > Thanks for the clarification. It's now apparent (to me)
> that the text
> > should be referring to 'configuration' or 'acquisition',
> rather than
> > 'determination'. Location determination, I hope you'd agree, is
> > provided in conjunction w/methods as listed in the IANA
> registry, not
> > via DHCP or HELD, etc.
> (
> > This same need for the right term applies to my 'C5' as well.
> >
> [AJW] Method technically in this case is probably wiremap,
> that is, we used some kind of circuit or tother information
> that enabled us to determine the location we have pre-stored
> in a database. The DHCP method as defined is a special case
> of wiremap, it says that the information provided came from
> DHCP relay information, not that DHCP was used at the
> acquisition protocol, at least that is my take on it.
> I don't think that we need to convey information relating to
> how we determined the location that we have in our wiremap database.
> Cheers
> James
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------
> 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]

The information contained in this message may be privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, or responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, any review, forwarding, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication or any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please so notify the sender immediately, and delete it and all attachments from your computer and network.

Geopriv mailing list
Received on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 15:44:09 -0700

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jun 21 2007 - 18:44:20 EDT