RE: [Geopriv] Message Flow

From: Winterbottom, James ^lt;James.Winterbottom@andrew.com>
Date: Sun Nov 25 2007 - 04:18:59 EST

Why? I would just create 2 contexts, one snapshot, one not. Mark the snapshot one as the one used-for-routing, and include the second URI for updates. I am remain unconvinced however that it actually matters if the PSAP gets a slightly different location. Can you indicate what the significant impact is? Cheers James > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > Sent: Sunday, 25 November 2007 2:00 PM > To: Winterbottom, James; 'Hannes Tschofenig' > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Geopriv] Message Flow > > But that wouldn't let the recipient get updated location, right? So it > wouldn't generally be useful. To be useful, it would have to have both a > snapshot and a "regular" reference, send both and mark them appropriately. > > The context draft doesn't match the syntax of -conveyance, which means we > have information loss from the proxy to the recipient. That means "mark > them appropriately" is hard. > > Brian > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Winterbottom, James [mailto:James.Winterbottom@andrew.com] > > Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 11:38 PM > > To: Brian Rosen; Hannes Tschofenig > > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Geopriv] Message Flow > > > > Brian, > > > > Inline. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > > Sent: Saturday, 24 November 2007 11:18 AM > > > To: 'Hannes Tschofenig' > > > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org > > > Subject: RE: [Geopriv] Message Flow > > > > > > > >> There is obviously a difference between the end host doing the > > job > > > and > > > > >> the proxy doing it. There is no difference between the two > > > approaches. > > > > >> > > > > > I'm pointing out a difference between them. In the endpoint > > route, > > > the > > > > PSAP > > > > > knows the location used for routing. In the proxy case, it > > doesn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well. That's not entirely correct if you consider the context draft > > in > > > > addition. It allows you to indicate to what the reference points. > > > > http://tools.ietf.org/wg/geopriv/draft-winterbottom-geopriv-held- > > > context- > > > > 01.txt > > > No, that is not sufficient. The PSAP (or any location recipient) > > can't do > > > anything that would get it the location the proxy got. > > > > > [AJW] This is not true. The proxy can request a snapshot location which > > means that the reference will always point to the same location. > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -- > > ---------------------- > > 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] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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 Sun, 25 Nov 2007 03:18:59 -0600

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Nov 25 2007 - 04:19:33 EST