Re: [earlywarning] Review of draft-rosen-atoca-cap

"Hannes Tschofenig" <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net> Wed, 21 July 2010 09:15 UTC

Return-Path: <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: earlywarning@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: earlywarning@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 986BB3A6907 for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 02:15:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sDujbIvCgAxO for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 02:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C000A3A6A6C for <earlywarning@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 02:15:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 9638 invoked by uid 0); 21 Jul 2010 09:15:24 -0000
Received: from 212.67.227.34 by www045.gmx.net with HTTP; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:15:22 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:15:22 +0200
From: "Hannes Tschofenig" <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03EB773170@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
Message-ID: <20100721091522.160070@gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03E9DCD1A0@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <4C45950D.1000205@gmx.net> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03EB773170@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
To: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
X-Authenticated: #29516787
X-Flags: 0001
X-Mailer: WWW-Mail 6100 (Global Message Exchange)
X-Priority: 3
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18c85IHEfocq1TP8dBp/5b9iPkT9BXewsWu6Wg3s1 +bPT5sQjMyM6f5J3ZJmjdF2BMWMHq/b6i/eQ==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-GMX-UID: 4vwgJu9IaHItXIkx5CQli3tiamdhZESx
X-FuHaFi: 0.62
Cc: hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com, earlywarning@ietf.org, Brian.Rosen@neustar.biz
Subject: Re: [earlywarning] Review of draft-rosen-atoca-cap
X-BeenThere: earlywarning@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for Authority-to-Individuals \(Early Warning\) Emergency " <earlywarning.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning>, <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/earlywarning>
List-Post: <mailto:earlywarning@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning>, <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:15:32 -0000

Hi Martin, 


> Thanks for taking the time Hannes,
> 
> I really wanted to highlight what I thought needed work.  We're obviously
> still at a very early stage in this work.
> 
> > The first challenge we ran into was the lack of a definition of alerts.
> > We tried to put a list of alert types in
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rosen-atoca-server-discovery-00 (see
> > Section 6.1) but faced a lot of resistance on the mailing list (see
> > http://www.ietf.org/mail-
> > archive/web/earlywarning/current/msg00130.html).
> > 
> > Before this aspect is addressed it is a bit difficult to say whether
> > filters, service URNs, resource lists, etc. are the right approach.
> 
> The alternative is tougher, but potentially more robust.  You have a
> single service with no associated taxonomy: urn:service:warning
> 
> The results of a query on this service returns all applicable services for
> the area.  Each contains a description.  The user chooses the warning
> services based on these descriptions.
> 
> There are costs, but it avoids the sticky taxonomy problem.

Interesting idea. Would be worthwhile to check how many different warning alert one would get with such an approach (in a specific geographical area). 



> 
> Another approach is to allow for services to be identified with
> proprietary URI identifiers.  These generic identifiers could be discovered using
> out-of-band means (side of bus, web search).  Then LoST doesn't come into it
> at all, SIP routing (possibly location-based) does all the hard work.  It's
> probably not-cool if we don't use LoST though.  

Probably the right way is often somewhere in the middle. Currently the ITU-T tries to establish a registry of organizations distributing alerts. One can obviously retrieve the list of organizations from there. A user would not want to do that, however. Instead, they would more likely opt for two approaches: (a) use a preconfigured list of organizations, or (b) use an aggregator that does these types of things for them. 

Ciao
Hannes

> 
> --Martin
> 
> ...snipped...
> _______________________________________________
> earlywarning mailing list
> earlywarning@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning