[atoca] What is the scope of "Secure Alerting Format"
"Rosen, Brian" <Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz> Thu, 13 September 2012 13:58 UTC
Return-Path: <brian.rosen@neustar.biz>
X-Original-To: atoca@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: atoca@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 503A421F8564 for <atoca@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 06:58:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.362
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.362 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.175, BAYES_20=-0.74, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZXWMLTN-iegQ for <atoca@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 06:58:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from neustar.com (keys.neustar.biz [156.154.17.104]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4643B21F8557 for <atoca@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 06:58:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=neustar.biz; s=neustarbiz; t=1347544796; x=1662904447; q=dns/txt; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Language: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=CSPsHP1DxSQOv8FLht0qh 2wVWTwUZMoDpPOXQ5fD440=; b=YE5x9MpiPNwQ9sJjEVZNbfc3lR4PPPX8QPLnq 4Zj1DyV2lKnsGYW9/Wnjhu6ZdPjufd7D5inDnoqG9vqz+FwlQ==
Received: from ([10.31.13.242]) by stihiron2.va.neustar.com with ESMTP with TLS id J041124103.13663878; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:59:55 -0400
Received: from STNTEXCH01.cis.neustar.com ([fe80::31b6:4d09:2ada:e6c0]) by STNTEXCHHT03.cis.neustar.com ([::1]) with mapi; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:57:59 -0400
From: "Rosen, Brian" <Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz>
To: "atoca@ietf.org" <atoca@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:57:58 -0400
Thread-Topic: What is the scope of "Secure Alerting Format"
Thread-Index: Ac2Rt8gkNW3bHJurTtidRvhJpElIrg==
Message-ID: <5619B668-E739-4B26-A6E9-A8A69BED49D5@neustar.biz>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
x-ems-proccessed: R64IxjzeHPwwd+efoj3ZcA==
x-ems-stamp: qvwzHRrK2/DxtRhF40Wgyg==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [atoca] What is the scope of "Secure Alerting Format"
X-BeenThere: atoca@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for the IETF Authority-to-Citizen Alert \(atoca\) working group." <atoca.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/atoca>, <mailto:atoca-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/atoca>
List-Post: <mailto:atoca@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:atoca-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/atoca>, <mailto:atoca-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 13:58:03 -0000
In the revised plan, we're supposed to be concentrating on a "Secure Alerting Format" But what is the scope of that? I raised, for example, the issue of "area of interest" where the typical CAP message content is not machine actionable to filter messages to the right devices. The polygon for "continental United States" is not practical to send, and many alerts just have the description. Is the thing that gets us the area of interest we can route on in scope or not? Is identity of the originator in scope? A lot of this depends on the line between "transport" and "format", and I don't understand where we are drawing that line. Brian
- [atoca] What is the scope of "Secure Alerting For… Rosen, Brian
- Re: [atoca] What is the scope of "Secure Alerting… Richard Barnes