RE: [Geopriv] Re: Review of draft-linsner-geopriv-relativeloc-01.txt

From: Stuard, Doug ^lt;Doug.Stuard@andrew.com>
Date: Wed Nov 28 2007 - 11:33:30 EST

Consider a wireless emergency caller who tells the PSAP call taker: "There's a fire about 400 meters east of me. The caller has no idea of his location, but the wireless system provides it to the PSAP as a geo. Doug > -----Original Message----- > From: Marc Linsner [mailto:mlinsner@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 11:27 AM > To: 'Brian Rosen' > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Geopriv] Re: Review of draft-linsner-geopriv-relativeloc- > 01.txt > > Brian, > > I'm trying to figure out if geo reference + offset is actually in use > or > deployed applications have gone with simply doing the math and provide > the > actual location in geo. With a reference point described using geo, > it's > pretty easy to figure out the geo coordinates of the offset. > > Do you know? > > -Marc- > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 10:30 AM > > To: 'Hannes Tschofenig'; 'Marc Linsner' > > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Geopriv] Re: Review of > > draft-linsner-geopriv-relativeloc-01.txt > > > > FWIW I do agree that the reference+offset is generally useful > > and the reference should be either geo or civic > > > > Brian > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net] > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 10:22 AM > > > To: Marc Linsner > > > Cc: geopriv@ietf.org > > > Subject: [Geopriv] Re: Review of > > > draft-linsner-geopriv-relativeloc-01.txt > > > > > > Hi Marc, > > > > > > > 2) In order to better understand the use case for expressing the > > > reference > > > > point as geo, can you provide real-world applications? > > > > > > > > > > Consider the question in a different fashion: LLDP-MED allows to > > > distribute the location information of an AP. It is able to provide > > > civic and geodetic information. > > > > > > One could argue that the reference location is the location > > of the AP. > > > > > > Following your line of argument one could claim that > > geodetic location > > > information in LLDP-MED for the APs location is not a useful > > > deployment option. I am not sure about this line of > > argument. Hence, I > > > believe we need both. > > > > > > Ciao > > > Hannes > > > > > > Btw, DHCP-civic has a what field. How would you set it for relative > > > location? > > > - the location of the network element believed to be closest to the > > > client (a value of 1), or > > > - the location of the client (a value of 2) > > > > > > Is the registration of new value for the 'what' field necessary? > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 Wed, 28 Nov 2007 11:33:30 -0500

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Nov 28 2007 - 11:33:43 EST