[dhcwg] Two companion IDs for consideration

"James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com> Wed, 30 October 2002 21:48 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14216 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:48:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9ULoTU04857 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:50:29 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org []) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9ULoTv04854 for <dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:50:29 -0500
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org []) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14198 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:48:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain []) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9ULlxv04775; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:48:04 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org []) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9ULinv04712 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:44:49 -0500
Received: from wells.cisco.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org []) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14035 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:42:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from JMPOLK-W2K (ssh-sjc-1.cisco.com []) by wells.cisco.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_14041)/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with SMTP id NAA04849; Wed, 30 Oct 2002 13:44:37 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <4.1.20021030145152.013ae820@localhost>
X-Sender: jmpolk@localhost
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:44:27 -0500
To: geopriv@mail.apps.ietf.org
From: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: [dhcwg] Two companion IDs for consideration
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>


A few of us have written two companion Drafts for consideration into 2 WGs

The first ID (into the DHC WG) is at:
and defines a Location Object format that satisfies (we hope) the basic
required elements to represent  a Target as well as the requirement for
granular resolution. This ID in no way affects the GEOPRIV Protocol and
it's goal for security or user control (ie rules for actively responding to
a Location request). It provides a mechanism for getting the location
information to an (wired) IP device which can then use the eventual GEOPRIV
Protocol as that WG specifies. There are no semantics written into the DHC
ID, and leaves some questions as to why the authors made certain choices.
Hence the reason for the second ID.

The second ID (into the GEOPRIV WG) is the semantics ID for the DHC ID.
It's at:
and shows (with many examples) why the meaning of "resolution" is better
suited to meet the requirement of granular (im)precision than "accuracy".
The examples of how the location Target device can simply alter the
resolution presented to a location request from within 3.11mm x 2.62mm to
as much as 1/6th that of the earth. Neither ID talks about the
circumstances of these choices - the authors believe this normative text
should reside elsewhere in GEOPRIV efforts with whatever rules that WG
places on its Protocol efforts and output.

Questions and comments have already been raised on the IEPREP WG list in
the Transport Area, so this combined effort looks like it will have
multiple lists with comments on them regarding these two IDs.

Comments are encouraged


"People generally demand more respect for their own rights than 
                         they are willing to allow for others"

dhcwg mailing list