RE: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Location Configuration Information for GEOPRIV

"Marc Linsner" <mlinsner@cisco.com> Wed, 02 July 2003 15:06 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA26291; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:06:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19XjBJ-0006K6-FN; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 11:06:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19XjAn-0006Ja-Fd for dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 11:05:32 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA26271 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 11:05:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19XjAk-0001ke-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 11:05:27 -0400
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19XjAk-0001kE-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 11:05:26 -0400
Received: from malone.cisco.com (malone.cisco.com [171.70.157.157]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h62F4kvd015459; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 08:04:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mlinsnerzk7abh (ssh-sjc-1.cisco.com [171.68.225.134]) by malone.cisco.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_14041)/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id IAA18397; Wed, 2 Jul 2003 08:04:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Marc Linsner <mlinsner@cisco.com>
To: 'Andrew Daviel' <andrew@daviel.org>
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org, geopriv@mail.apps.ietf.org
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] Fwd: Working Group Last Call: Location Configuration Information for GEOPRIV
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 11:04:44 -0400
Message-ID: <000501c340ab$46784be0$220d0d0a@mlinsnerzk7abh>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4024
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0307011944440.15517@home.daviel.org>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Andrew, thank you, this is good information.  To be sure we all
understand each other, please see comments below.  Remember, this
mechanism we are proposing will be most useful for wired network
connections, the easiest type of device to locate (and currently the
largest type of connection used within an enterprise).  Wireless devices
will have to employ a more exotic mechanism possibly at layer 1 or 2 for
a more precise device location.

> It depends on the jurisdiction. For instance, it is different in
Canada
> and the US - one uses mean lower low water and the other uses lowest
> normal tide or something as a nautical chart datum.

For those who are struggling with this, it is not our intention to
(re)define zero altitude.  We are simply attempting to provide a
mechanism for people who understand altitude values to share them
amongst each other via a standardized mechanism.  If one were to receive
such data, it is assumed that they will understand the definition of
zero altitude within the jurisdiction/authority from which the data
originated.  Some map datum define zero altitude, some don't.  For those
that don't, we define mean low tide.

> 
> Defining elevation seems to be more problematic than defining
position.
> If consumer-grade GPS has a horizontal resolution between 5-30 metres,
> that's good enough to give a street or maybe a room in a building. But
the
> vertical resolution may be double that, and that's 3 floors at best,
even
> assuming you have ground level sorted out properly. Other navigation
> techniques such as LORAN (obsolescent) or cellphone-signal based may
not
> give elevation at all.

Hence our measurement unit of floors.  We are expecting the altitude
data within the MU floors to be derived from the numbers on the wall
next to the elevators, not from a gps or similar device.


-Marc Linsner-




_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg